‘See that guy. If he runs, we run.’ These were the words of our driver the first time a Saudi Arabian army guard placed a mirror under our car to look for bombs. It recalled the first time I visited Chile in 1992 and drove out of the airport straight into an armed communist uprising. The driver said to me in a thick Spanish accent, ‘In this moment, you are a communist.’ To which I replied, ‘Yes, comrade!’

It’s episodes like this that straighten you up when you travel. They provide a sobering clarity that you don’t get visiting the air-conditioned offices of businesses in the West or being put through the indignity of being made to pee in a bottle in Western industrial sites.

I personally enjoyed my time in Saudi Arabia and maintain some of those acquaintances and friendships to this day. It is a very serene place with a very strange level of male emotionality, possibly due to the total absence of women in public life. But if we didn’t live in compounds with army guards, not just armed guards, there are those among the fully armed locals of The Kingdom who would have tried to kill us. No doubt. There is nothing even slightly controversial about that statement. Neither to the working expat community or to subjects of Saudi Arabia.

The Al-Saud tribe themselves are one of the world’s most remarkable success stories. The Kingdom, as the locals call it, has its own ways, culture and traditions. Yet even in an absolute dictatorship like that, the royal family will not implement changes contrary to what their people want. They would never flood the country with foreign nationals and dilute the native population’s rights to citizenship.

In fact, the same can be said for most of the world from China to Botswana, or from Hungary to Chile. Yet the countries we accord with Western Civilisation, a civilisational bloc with much to say about freedom, democracy, and human rights, decided that aligning themselves with the preferences of its citizens was, I think, racist or some kind of ‘phobia’ last time I checked.

There’s a lot to be said about the cultural impulses of the West, and if we are honest, largely the anglosphere. We defeated the Nazis, stared down the communists, liberalised global trade, stood up the United Nations, and much more. But starting from the Hawke/Keating era, our governments implement policies that either disregard the majority views of its citizenry or actively work against the native populations of these countries. And yes, I understand the term ‘native population’ will bring many to the point of frothing rage; that’s sort of the problem.

So, if our governments are not acting in our best interests, the question needs to be earnestly asked, can we truly call ourselves democracies? If our system has boiled down to ‘beg, vote, pray’, and getting what you’re given, then this is a valid question.

Since the 9/11 terrorist attack by the Islamist group Al-Qaeda, the West has been relentless in driving mass immigration from Islamic countries. A determination that has continued despite two decades of growing Islamic terrorism. Through the horrors of the Pakistani rape gangs in the UK, the Cologne rape crisis after the surrender of Europe’s borders, and through increasing terrorism levels in Australia up until the Bondi Beach massacre of December 14, 2025. An event that our own Prime Minister refused to name as Islamic terrorism for several days.

Yet still the middle-class politicians and their attendant bureaucracies continue with mass Islamic immigration, arguably without sufficient vetting and background checks, as if they were an endangered species in the wild. Koala bear priority given to the world’s second largest and rapidly growing diaspora, while Christians particularly, the world’s most persecuted minority, are not only ignored, but actively shunned. On social media the outcry for the Christians of Nigeria is overwhelming. Amongst the middle-class newsrooms and politicians, no one seems to notice or care.

Every Western country that has indulged in mass immigration has seen a concomitant doubling or tripling of the rape and sexual assault rate.

In the extremely limited cases where public information allows for further scrutiny, it is revealing. The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå) has historically been hesitant to categorise by ethnicity, but the sheer velocity of the shift between 2023 and 2026 has forced a more ‘hardened’ data release.

As of the latest 2025 reporting cycle, individuals of non-Western origin are overrepresented in reported rape and aggravated rape cases in Sweden by a factor of approximately 5.5 to 1 compared to native Swedes. In cases involving multiple perpetrators, the figure rises to around 85 per cent. In so-called ‘stranger rapes’, where there is no prior relationship between victim and offender, the victims are disproportionately native Swedish women, while the perpetrators are overwhelmingly drawn from recent migrant cohorts.

This hit home particularly hard during International Women’s Day, where state Premier, Jacinta Allan commented, ‘Proud to stand alongside these incredible women in our Parliament, who champion Victorian women every day. Happy International Women’s Day.’ In relation to a photo published on social media of female Victorian parliamentarians.

Yet, the rate of recorded rape and sexual assault in Victoria alone has risen by approximately 165 per cent over the past two decades. While across Australia, it has risen by approximately 113 per cent. However, unlike Sweden, the level of data obfuscation in Australia largely obscures the ethnicity of perpetrators.

However, in the absence of less detailed information like Sweden has, we can only see a correlation between mass immigration and rape in Australia. A statistical situation no one seems at all motivated to correct. Nor, it appears, does anyone care about an ever-increasing rate of female rape.

This institutional indifference is mirrored in the theatre of our leadership. Listening to the Prime Minister ignore the verbal assault he received during his visit to a mosque, a mere 96 days after the Bondi massacre, one is struck by the sheer velocity of the gaslighting. We saw the verbal assault live on television; he saw a moment of ‘vibrant’ community engagement. He turned a civilisational friction into an uneventful day out with mates.

In Riyadh, the Al-Saud would never dream of imposing a demographic transformation that imperilled their own safety or their daughters. In Melbourne and Sydney, our leaders celebrate their own ‘allyship’ while the statistics of sexual victimisation move steadily into the red without anyone noticing, let alone being concerned.

I believe the rise of One Nation is an indicator that the ‘beg, vote, and pray’ system is in its terminal phase. And when the collapse happens, the system must be changed to include direct democracy triggers like citizen-initiated referenda and government petitions. We must ensure we are never again at the mercy of a managerial class that appears hell-bent on our destruction.