There is an insight piece by Justin Murphy, http://jmrphy.net/blog/2017/05/15/psychology-of-prohibiting-outside-thinkers/, which deals, from the perspective of the Left, with the Left-wing dominance of the culture of discourse in the West.
Why does the Left close down Right wing thought, on moral grounds? Actually he should have probed deeper and recognised that the Left openly resort to violence to shut down anyone they see as a threat. On university campuses, even notices challenging aspects of globalisation get torn down. Therefore, the article is somewhat superficial and does not address the clear fact that the Left has state-legitimated terrorists who freely break the law, and are permitted to get away with it. These terrorists within a few years move into positions of power and continue the agenda of national suicide and racial destruction.

    Still, for its limits, the article has some merits, although written in the usual academic language:

to THE AGE
     The great majority of Australians are unlikely to endorse 'constitutional' recognition of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, no matter what formula is produced at the  Uluru meeting ('Call to be bold on recognition', 25/5). This is because it is so obviously against the national interest as a whole. We are not willing to yield the sovereignty of any part of our nation to a very small ethnic group, no matter what their ancestry or the past sufferings of their ancestors during dispossession.

     Thus, their talk of 'indigenous sovereignty' at once arouses our opposition. So do demands that 'substantive change' must 'tell the truth about history.' We insist on maintaining open debate on all aspects of human history. Moreover, the current public debate in the media is not doing justice to non-Aboriginal Australians. A good example is the extraordinary assertion by Cheryl Saunders ('Constitutional recognition is a work in progress', 24/5) that the question of the meaning of recognition 'can only be answered by those being recognised.' Those doing the recognising have rights too!
NJ, Belgrave, Vic   

     The government tells us that the “official’ unemployment rate in Australia is 5.7 percent, which is “vote for me, good.” But, as pointed out in an article by the razor-sharp Adam Creighton (The Australian, May 22, 2017, p. 12), the official figure is nonsense, with the unemployment rate being at almost three times that, at 15 percent.

     Rather than 732,000 Australians not being able to find work, more than 2.26 million are unemployed. The way the government fakes the figures is to use a definition of "employment” that has any one working more than an hour a week as employed!  To be unemployed, the test is much harder: one needs to have applied for a job in the past four weeks and be ready to start work.

We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart:

Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs.
This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago.
This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.
How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?
With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood.
Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers. They should be our hope for the future.
These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.
We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.
We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution. Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.
We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.
In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

     There is a lot in the papers recently about what a great bloke and leader Bob Menzies was: “Menzies Taught Us to Strive and Never Yield”: The Australian , May 22, 2017, p. 12.

     Now wait a minute! This is the same Bob Menzies called “pig iron bob,’ who gladly sold Australian steel to the imperial Japanese, who then used it to make weapons to be fired back at Aussies? See: http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/image.aspx?id=tcm:13-22114. If you research this on the net, you will see trade unionist sites and also old, not new Left sites, which in those days supported Aussie workers, as advancing the pig iron bob criticism. You will also find academics poo-pooing this, saying that it is an urban myth, just like the “Brisbane line,” Bob’s alleged plan to abandon all of Australia above a hypothetical line going through Brisbane.

    I am taking this opportunity to write to you with regard to decisions made by the meeting of more than 250 community leaders forming the Indigenous Referendum Council (or as they call it ‘the 2017 National Constitutional Convention’ held at Uluru this week.

     The Referendum Council grew out of the multi-million dollar federally funded Recognise organisation formed to gather support for the “recognise” (in the Australian Constitution) movement.

to THE AGE
     There is no just and equitable path to any form of ‘constitutional’ recognition of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, if the interests of other Australians (the great majority) are to be taken into account as well. The key proposals of the Uluru Statement from the Heart (‘Summit calls for Indigenous voice, a path to treaty’, 27/5) need to be firmly rejected. Ideally, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition should politely respond by saying that they are unacceptable to Australians as a whole, so that no referendum on them will be arranged.

     What has happened is that a very small minority of Australians who, while sharing indigenous heritage, also in many cases share non-indigenous heritage too, are trying to secure unjustified advantages for themselves. It is not even certain that the participants at the all-indigenous convention truly represented Aboriginals as a whole. The Uluru proposals will not win in a referendum; and our politicians must be told that no introduction of them through Parliament without a referendum is acceptable.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

to THE AGE
     It is reasonable for our media to have an ‘Anglo-Saxon/European focus’ as in their news presentation of the Manchester bombing (Letters, 26/5), because we are a nation with predominantly British origins and because a majority of our citizens have some British ancestry. One can approve of this coverage and yet also feel indignation at the West’s violent intrusions in the Middle East.
     A different area of imbalance concerns the campaign for Aboriginal ‘constitutional’ recognition. Almost daily we read of the latest pronouncements on this by Aboriginal spokespeople. Why is so little comment on the proposal by ordinary Australians opposed to its injustice and potentiality for national division appearing in our media? The Anglo-Saxon/European bias is nowhere to be seen!
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     The world, especially the West, but also the Second and Third Worlds, are rapidly spirally into violence and social breakdown, and we are foolish to ignore this or put our heads in the sand, for we are likely to be kicked hard in the butt by reality: http://preparedness.news/2017-05-12-venezuelan-protesters-have-begun-pelting-government-police-with-poop-bombs.html.

America, as always is a show case of what is to come, and is rapidly falling apart: http://rioting.news/2017-05-07-the-big-breakup-residents-in-a-half-dozen-states-talking-secession-we-are-no-longer-one-nation.html,  and we can expect little old Australia to be only a few years behind in the disintegration stakes. The battles of American Civil War II (https://www.amazon.com/Civil-War-Two-Breakup-America/dp/0929408179), are already taking place on the streets: http://takimag.com/article/the_battle_of_new_orleans_gavin_mcinnes#axzz4h0Vos7dR.

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     Indigenous business leader Sean Gordon appears to be correct in stating (‘1967 did not change indigenous lives: CEO’, 16/5) that the campaign for ‘reconciliation’ and constitutional recognition has ‘weakened’. This is because it is becoming clearer that the whole operation is against the interests of Australians generally. Respect for our Aboriginal culture and affection for the Aboriginal people as prior occupants of the continent before European settlement is widespread in our nation and rightly so; but self-interested special pleading by a very small group that will take Australia towards constitutional disunity and eventual political partition is thoroughly on the nose, as it should be.

     Moreover, Gordon should note that it does not matter what our politicians may have already decided, the issue will ultimately be decided by the entire Australian people at referendum; any attempt to disenfranchise us in this context would be bitterly resisted.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     Don’t get too excited yet, all those lovers of diversity out there, but there could be the first multiracial royal wedding: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4501248/African-love-nest-proof-Harry-engage-Meghan-Markle.html, with soon the pitter patter of little multiracial feet, which we all believe will be truly excellent. The couple have spent a few nights at an African love nest, the Maliba Mountain Lodge in Lesotho. The article quotes senior staff at the Palace who think that announcement of a wedding will be made fairly soon. I am holding my breath in anticipation.

     This will be the first royal to marry an African American: http://www.elleuk.com/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/. I am sure that readers and staff, who cringe every time one of us gives a race essay “oh, not the race stuff again,” time and time again over the years,  will be ecstatic about the royal family becoming so multicultural, and multiracial.

     Don’t you just love computers and IT, how truly easy and exciting it has made life? And, what a great idea it was for the West to put everything on-line, especially medical records and the like. Nobody would ever hack into it and bring the whole system to its knees, could they? That’s just Y2K nonsense.

     However, hackers have done precisely that: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-hospitals-idUSKBN18820S; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4502384/Global-task-force-launched-snare-cyber-attack-gang.html.

     Living under a rock, I don’t know much about art, but I recently stumbled upon the work of Cleon Peterson: http://cleonpeterson.com/. I do not know what his political philosophy is, but his artwork primarily depicts whites being raped (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/iraqi-immigrant-arrested-raping-nursery-school-child-sweden/),  tortured and dismembered by blacks and other races: just follow Google images and make up your own mind. But, I wonder if he had depicted white figures killing black ones, would his work still excite the establishment? It could have an impact regardless of the artist’s intentions.

     For what it is worth, this artist’s art is even on the sail of a de Rothschild boat: http://www.mysailing.com.au/latest/edmond-de-rothschild-unveils-new-maxi.

     A new book (published March 21, 2017), by Jancee Dunn, How Not to Hate Your Husband After Kids:http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2017/05/happy_mother_s_day_you_will_hate_your_husband_after_having_a_baby.html
https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Your-Husband-After-Kids/dp/0316267104, probably should have been called: Don’t Get married, Or Don’t have Kids. Here is a sample of what to expect in reading this book, from an extract at Slate.com:

“Perhaps the single most widely cited piece of research on marriage and children comes from couples’ therapists John and Julie Gottman, who found that 67 percent of couples are less satisfied with their marriages after having a baby. A 2009 study of first-time parents in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that a scant 7 percent of mothers reported feeling more satisfied with their marriage, compared with 15 percent of fathers. (As of now, the available research is much more robust for heterosexual couples.) Many factors conspire to shorten a new parent’s fuse: hallucinatory fatigue, zigzagging hormones, a fraught learning curve, and, as one paper I read noted succinctly, “increased interactions with medical professionals.”

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     The assertions of a couple of eminent citizens on constitutional recognition (‘Conservatives back “tangible” change model’, 17/5) are unlikely to change the views of the great mass of conservative Australians, who in any referendum will not support any proposal, ‘minimalist’ or ‘substantive’, that threatens the political unity of our nation and which is fundamentally inequitable.
     We keep seeing it from republicans; now we see it from advocates of constitutional recognition: intensely uttered assertions quite unsupported by convincing analysis and reasoning. What fools Australians will be if they allow either noisy group to disrupt the peace and security of our continent and nation! Adequate recognition can and does occur without any dangerous tampering with the constitution.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic  

     As a divorced school teacher, I don’t have much to do in my free time, so imagine my delight to discover that someone from China is reading our work, and savagely criticising us, well, me! At last a true purpose in life, free to devote hours of once wasted time now  to counter-attacking! Life has meaning again!

    Now Mr Li, I call him, was  strongly opposed to the idea that Nordics, Northern Europeans have anything worthwhile in their pre-history, as well as the idea that Africans have less cultural accomplishments than Europeans, with the East Asians being top of the pops (Jews having the highest IQ though). I have responded to the Afro-centric thesis, which is rejected by most anthropologists, but perhaps Mr Li would like to talk about contemporary Chinese reactions to African migrants as depicted here: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/asia/africans-leaving-guangzhou-china/, and about a thousand other internet articles.

     Muslim academic Susan Carland, has joined the Islam/feminism debate, claiming that sharia law can in fact fight injustice against women and sexism: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/author-susan-carland-buys-into-feminist-islam-row/news-story/17b2a7cc7fed1f03836260bb897bd346. Just to be sure I get her position right, here is what is said in The Australian, and we therefore know that it must be good and tasty:

“Academic and author Susan Carland is the latest high-profile Muslim to publicly defend Islam’s feminist credentials, despite her own book conceding many of the faith believe the religion to be “inherently at odds” with feminism.
Launching Fighting Hislam: Women, Faith and Sexism in Sydney this week, Dr Carland claimed that sharia—the legal system adopted across many oppressive Islamic regimes—could be interpreted in such a way to fight sexism and injustice against women.
“You can have secular feminism, you can have Islamic feminism, you can have all different types of feminism,” she told the audience.
Dr Carland, a Sunni Muslim married to television presenter Waleed Aly, made a similar argument in an opinion piece published in The Conversation yesterday, where she wrote that “many Muslims see the Qur’an and hadith as a defence for their arguments against sexism, not as a stumbling block to women’s liberation”.

     Germany is now confiscating homes and giving them to migrants:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10352/germany-migrants-property-rights.
In Hamburg authorities have confiscated six units in the Hamm district and given them to migrants. The units will be renovated and the owners of the properties billed! It is rumoured that the German New World Order authorities will next force people to share their living space with migrants.

     Expect this sort of dispossession to be standard in the future across the West, as the elites turn up the heat, to burn us to a crisp.

     Once upon a time I was known as Len the Cleaner, and I wrote a mighty fine blog, between cleaning men’s toilets. I was never permitted to clean women toilets, that being done by my evil sister, Lennette the Cleaner.  Now, we have transgender bathrooms and people all over the internet have been sending in emails wanting to know my opinion about them. Look here is the enlightened public service doing the right thing again with people’s money: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/public-service-push-for-genderneutral-bathrooms-20170511-gw2taq.html.

     I think that the more toilets and genders we have the better things will be for people like me, who were born to clean up other people’s messes. And, the more genders, the better. I think there are 32 at the moment, but I could think up that many at breakfast. As that great defender of freedom, comedian Charlie Mao said, “let a thousand flowers bloom.” Somebody who killed millions would know a thing or two about messes.

     The Clexit Coalition today called on President Trump to keep his election promise to withdraw from the Paris Climate Treaty and stop US payments to all UN global warming programs.
The Clexit (ClimateExit) Coalition, comprising over 175 representatives from 25 countries, aims to prevent ratification or local enforcement of the UN Paris climate treaty.
See: http://clexit.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/clexit-members.pdf

    The Secretary of Clexit, Mr Viv Forbes of Australia, said that all nations will suffer from the destructive energy policies being promoted in the UN’s war on cheap, reliable hydro-carbon fuels and the backbone industries that rely on them – mining and smelting, farming, fishing, forestry, processing and manufacturing.
He was supported by Professor Will Happer, Professor of Physics at Princeton University who said today: