Reviewed: Anglophobia: The Unrecognised Hatred, by Harry Richardson and Frank Alter. Social Technologies. 2023.

In the relentless Machiavellian Leftist attack on European culture, we hear much about Bad Whites in Canada, England, and the United States. Yet we hear little about whites in the other large English-speaking nation, Australia. Tucked away “Down Under,” with just 26 million inhabitants, the continent maintained a “White Australia” immigration policy until 1973 that kept the country overwhelmingly white. Even today, it is 90 percent white, and 81 percent ethnically British, about the same as the Mother Country whose convicts settled it. But as Anglophobia: The Unrecognised Hatred reveals in great detail, Anglo-Australia is under sustained racial and cultural attack. Leftists, particularly organized Jewish leftists,have mounted a propaganda campaign that says Anglo-Australians are racists who should be ashamed of their history.

Top Australian TV host Stan Grant steps down after enduring racist abuse https://t.co/F3hJ5xPyzy

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) May 19, 2023

A recent example: Stan Grant, a top television host for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, quit the job because he suffered, he claimed, a torrent of “racist abuse” after his comments about Australia’s history when he covered the coronation of King Charles III:

During the segment, he said the symbol of the Crown “represented the invasion, the theft of land—and in our case—the exterminating war,” referring to a period of martial law in 1820s New South Wales that was used to justify the killings of Wiradjuri people.

[Stan Grant: Top Australian TV host steps down after enduring racist abuse, by Tiffanie Turnbull, BBC, May 19, 2023]

Grant, right, is a Wiradjuri (I.E. an Australian Aborigine)and the Anglophobia he unleashed is what Australian political psychologist Frank Salter, best known for his book On Genetic Interests, and best-selling author Harry Richardson, dissect in their new book.

It has a stark message. In the topsy-turvy world in which being weak and “marginalized” is lauded, being English or British—being white—the group that created the modern industrial world and its prosperity, is nothing short of a crime. For the white man’s success cannot reflect genetics, which is unthinkable, or hard work, which is even more unthinkable, but instead reflects an inherent evil, a great sin:

The authors:

To prevent a man from claiming merit as an explanation for his success is to imply that he has been lucky or has cheated. Similarly, it is implicitly Anglophobic to impose a blanket denial that Anglos have done well partly due to merit.

All Anglo-Australians share in the sins of their ancestors, even though blacks, who descended ultimately from black slavers, do not share in the sins of their ancestors. Thus, hating, discriminating against, sexually assaulting, and even killing Anglo-Australians is acceptable simply because being an Anglo is such a deadly sin.

Being born white, the authors explains, means being born “privileged” and somehow having won the lottery of life. And yet:

There are things, often small things, which are easy to ignore and assuming that you aren’t silly enough to break the unspoken rules, life can go on for the most part without ever really having to think about them too much. There are words you mustn’t say, people you mustn’t criticise and policies you have to go along with, even if you don’t really agree with them. Occasionally, these “things” can have more tangible effects. These can range from needing a higher score for university entrance to being passed over for a job or a promotion.

And as in England with its grooming gangs, Muslim gangs have raped Australian women precisely because they are Australian, and the Anglo authorities turned a blind eye, looking upon the victim s with contempt. The authors aver that other ethnic groups are experts at victim-signalling and exploit white guilt to attain the whip hand over Anglos, who can’t compete when it comes to feigned weakness:

White, and particularly Anglo, culture strongly discourages victimhood. Instead, it encourages self-determination and stoicism, encapsulated in the historic British concept of the “stiff upper lip.” Unfortunately, in the face of organised and well-funded minority victimhood strategies, Anglo stoicism has been a losing response.

Defining key terms such as “race” and “ethnocentrism,” the authors document the rising tide of Anglophobia in Australia, especially since the 1970s and, in particular, through “Vilification,” “Hostile Discrimination” and “Violence.” Beginning with “Vilification,” we have Susan Sontag: “There must be something terribly wrong with western white civilization. … The white race is the cancer of human history.”

Alas, any American idea will make its way Down Under. In 2012, an Aboriginal leader called officials “f*cking racist white c*nts” to their faces because, in his culture, swearing is apparently a kind of “exclamation mark.” Of course, he got away with it. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Australian academics told Anglo-Australians they were racists, that they were responsible for the sins of their people and, of course, for the great sin of colonialism. Australian politicians flagellated Anglos while denying them the right to a sense of self. “With our heritage of White Australia and membership of the British Empire,” the authors write, “it’s too risky for us even to glance in the direction of talk of an Anglosphere. It revives all those unfortunate recollections and associations.”

Australian schools that fly the Aboriginal flag teach white kids to hate themselves and that they “stole” Australia from the aborigines.

Pleased to present Australian and Aboriginal flags to St Aloysius Catholic College in Kingston. By flying these flags students can celebrate our shared identity, learn the significance of our national symbols and pay respect to First Nations people. pic.twitter.com/WN4LjRdSOK

— Catryna Bilyk (@Catbilyk) March 1, 2022

Depictions of Anglo society, as in England and America, are treated with intense suspicion. History is rewritten—through inaccurate historical dramas and documentaries—to imply that there was never a dominant Anglo people, yet the Anglos are punished for that very dominance.

“More damaging is the falsification of British and white social history in recent movies,” the authors write, most notably the appearance of blacks in places they simply never were, such as the courts of Queen Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots. A black actress was cast as Anne Boleyn.

When Hugh Jackman or Chris Hemsworth will be cast as Martin Luther King Jr. we are not given to know, but at any rate, the authors summarize the entertainment industry’s anti-white attack on history this way:

The falsification of Anglo history is a form of Anglophobia. Anglos and other European-descended peoples will not be able to claim and hold their identities without making historically correct movies. That will not be possible until the Anglophobic bias of film producers and distributors is abolished.

The book also traces the institutionalization of Anglophobia. A key promoter of multiculturalism in Australia in 1960, argue the authors, was Walter Lippman, of the Victorian Board of Deputies. Jewish organizations have been central to promoting Aboriginal rights. Jewish lawyers have worked pro bono to prosecute critics of Sudanese immigration:

In June 2021 the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the African Australian Advocacy Centre—the AAAC—held an inaugural friendship dinner. The AAAC is a peak body formed in 2019 to represent all African communities in Australia. The rationale for this cooperation was that the Jewish and African communities shared a common negative experience in Australia.

The authors effectively argue, a la Kevin MacDonald, that organized Jewish interests helped develop Anglophobia. This is an interesting possibility, but I would like to have seen the authors statistically demonstrate that claim, which would at least partially insulate them from charges of cherry-picking their data in a malign attempt to incite “anti-Semitism.”.

Anglophobia is a weapon used by English elites to control their own population, the authors find, but I would also see it in evolutionary terms.

The power-hungry can overcome competitors by making them feel guilty, humiliated, and collectively worthless, which will break their spirit. But Anglos can fight back by not permitting the Woke Machiavellians to break them and instead directly attacking Anglophobia and the subversive process that created it. Leftist “Anglos” who promote Anglophobia are traitors who collaborate with guilt-inducing foreign groups to get personal power, as studies show, while psychologically breaking most of their own people.

In other words, the authors call for Anglos to fight back with leftist tactics. Maybe the reaction to Grant’s imprudent, intemperate remarks are a sign that Anglo-Austrialians and other Anglos have had enough. As it is, there is no greater victim than the Anglo, or so we must tell ourselves.

Written by Australian political psychologist Frank Salter, best known for his book On Genetic Interests which calculated exactly how many people of a different ethnic group must enter your territory for it to be the genetic equivalent of losing a child, and best-selling author Harry Richardson, the book has a stark message:

In Topsy-Turvy World in which being weak and marginalized is lauded, being English or British, whether legally or by descent, places you at the bottom of the pile. You are part of a group that is responsible for almost the all of the modern, industrial world and is thus hugely influential. Yet this cannot success cannot be a reflection of genetics (that’s unthinkable), so it can only be due to some kind of inherent evil; some kind of sin. As the authors put it: “To prevent a man from claiming merit as explanation for his success is to imply that he has been lucky or has cheated. Similarly, it is implicitly Anglophobic to impose a blanket denial that Anglos have done well partly due to merit.”

You, as an “Anglo,” share in the sins of your ancestors, even though though blacks descended, ultimately, from black slavers do not share in the sins of theirs. It is, therefore, acceptable to “hate” you in a way that it is almost nobody else. You can, therefore, be discriminated against, be sexually abused, even be killed, because of the original sin of being an “Anglo.”

The authors explain that being born white is supposed to meaning being born “privileged,” somehow having won the lottery of life and yet:

“There are things, often small things, which are easy to ignore and assuming that you aren’t silly enough to break the unspoken rules, life can go on for the most part without ever really having to think about them too much. There are words you mustn’t say, people you mustn’t criticise and policies you have to go along with, even if you don’t really agree with them. Occasionally, these “things” can have more tangible effects. These can range from needing a higher score for university entrance to being passed over for a job or a promotion.”

In even more extreme cases, as has occurred in the UK and Australia, white girls have been groomed and raped by Muslim gangs explicitly because they are Anglos and the Anglo authorities have turned and blind eye, looking upon their own people with contempt. The authors aver that other ethnic groups are strongly adept at victim-signalling and, so, playing on white guilt and covertly attaining power. Anglos just don’t seem to have what it takes in the group selection battle of feigned weakness:

“White, and particularly Anglo, culture strongly discourages victimhood. Instead, it encourages self-determination and stoicism, encapsulated in the historic British concept of the “stiff upper lip.” Unfortunately, in the face of organised and well-funded minority victimhood strategies, Anglo stoicism has been a losing response.”

The book—after defining key terms such as “ethnocentrism” and “race” – then takes on a tour of the rising tide of Anglophobia in Australia, especially since the 1970s and, in particular, through the processes of “Vilification,” “Hostile Discrimination” and “Violence.” Beginning with “Vilification,” we have Susan Sontag (1933-2004) proclaiming, “There must be something terribly wrong with western white civilization . . . The white race is the cancer of human history.”

Alas, any US idea will make its way Down Under eventually. In 2012, an Aboriginal leader was allowed to get away with calling officials “Fucking racist white cunts” to their faces because, in his culture, swearing is apparently a kind of “exclamation mark.” Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Australian academics began to tell Anglo Australians what a fundamentally “racist” society they were. Anglos began to be told that they were somehow personally responsible for the sins of their people and for colonialism, which has no positive dimensions to it whatsoever. In fact, Australian politicians would flagellate Anglos while denying them the right to a sense of self: “With our heritage of White Australia and membership of the British Empire . . . it’s too risky for us even to glance in the direction of talk of an Anglosphere. It revives all those unfortunate recollections and association.”

Since the 1990s, Australian children are taught in schools how terrible they, the Aboriginal flag is flown, and they are told that they “stole” Australia. Depictions of Anglo society, as in the UK and US, are treated with intense suspicion. History is rewritten—through inaccurate historical dramas and documentaries—to imply that there was never a dominant Anglo people, yet the Anglos are punished for that very dominance.

“More damaging is the falsification of British and white social history in recent movies. Casting black people as prominent members of Queen Elizabeth I’s and Mary Queen of Scots’ courts (e.g. Mary Queen of Scots, 2018), having Winston Churchill converse with a black Londoner in the Underground in 1940 (Darkest Hour, 2017), or showing non-whites as normal in Medieval Europe (Anne Boleyn, 2021; Cinderella, 2021; A Knight’s Tale, 2001; Robin Hood: Men in Tights, 1993; Horrible Histories), are social lies.”

As the authors summarise: “The falsification of Anglo history is a form of Anglophobia. Anglos and other European-descended peoples will not be able to claim and hold their identities without making historically correct movies. That will not be possible until the Anglophobic bias of film producers and distributors is abolished.”

A particularly interesting part of this book traces precisely how Anglophobia became institutionalized in Australia. A key promoter of multiculturalism in Australia in 1960, argue the authors, was Walter Lippman, of the Victorian Board of Deputies. Jewish organizations have been central to promoting Aboriginal rights. Jewish lawyers have worked pro bono to prosecute critics of Sudanese immigration. As the authors put it:

“In June 2021 the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the African Australian Advocacy Centre—the AAAC—held an inaugural friendship dinner. The AAAC is a peak body formed in 2019 to represent all African communities in Australia. The rationale for this cooperation was that the Jewish and African communities shared a common negative experience in Australia.”

The authors effectively argue, a la Kevin MacDonald, that organized Jewish interests are highly relevant to the development of Anglophobia in Australia. This is an interesting possibility, but I would like to have seen a detailed attempt to statistically demonstrate which would absolve the authors from charging of cherry-picking their data.

Overall, this is an insightful and well-written book which explore the dynamics of Anglophobia in Australia and beyond. In essence, they seem to find that Anglophobia is a weapon used by English elites to control their own population.

I would see it in evolutionary terms. If you are power-hungry then you can outcompete others, if they have a strong sense of guilt, by making them feel guilty and humiliated. They must feel that they are collectively worthless, meaning their spirit will be broken. Your competitors are those who cannot be “broken” by this process—you fellow Woke Machiavellians—and your serious enemies are those that would actually attack the process itself. The “Anglos” need to do precisely. Liberal “Anglos” are traitors who collaborate with guilt-inducing foreign groups to get personal power, as studies show, while psychologically breaking most of their own people.

This book is a call for Anglos to use the very tactics these traitors employ in order to fight back. There is no greater victim than the Anglo, or so we must tell ourselves.

Edward Dutton (email him | VDare by permission of author or representative)