Cory Bernardi, Spotify and future strategies

On January 23, 2018, in Commentary, by natalt

by Michael Kennedy

The action taken against Cory Bernardi and his Spotify Australia playlist serve as a good example of how Cultural Leftism exerts its power and maintains its ability to force its agenda on others.

The story is that Australian Conservatives created a Spotify playlists of Australian songs for the purpose of celebrating Australia Day on the 26th of January.

This action, and this action alone drew the ire of artists whose songs had appeared in the playlist.

Mr Bernardi faced a backlash this week from artists including Savage Garden and The Hilltop Hoods for including their music on his play list, created in response to public broadcaster Triple J’s controversial decision to move its Hottest 100 countdown amid growing calls from activists to change the date of Australia Day from January 26.

Darren Hayes began the trouble with an implied threat of legal action. Spotify, which is a Swedish company weighed in with an Australian representative stating “Spotify has actively supported marriage, gender and indigenous equality initiatives over the last five years, and believes in a diverse and multicultural Australia,”. The playlist apparently violates the terms of service which state…

“The Brand may not create or share any Spotify playlists, whether within the Spotify Service or elsewhere, that imply an endorsement or relationship between the Brand and any artist or any other party, unless the Brand has independently obtained the rights to imply such an endorsement. Brands may wish to consult Spotify’s Brand Play list Guidelines.”

As Cory did not make any statement which implied that the music or the artists who had created it had any political affiliations or were promoting any particular ideology, its difficult to see how the terms were violated. None of the artists who expressed concern were able to either. In fact, it doesn’t really matter as modern Cultural Leftism doesn’t rely on proving offence or violations of Codes of Conducts. It is sufficient Cultural Leftists to merely to claim that one has been violated, and this claim alone can serve as a casus belli. In this case, if Savage Garden say it is an issue, then it is an issue and they don’t have to point to any evidence to back up their claims. Further, Icehouse frontman on ABC Radio’s “Drive” program claimed that the [inclusion of his hit “Great Southern Land” is in breach of his “moral rights”] ( His claim is that he doesn’t want his music politicised, but again, doesn’t offer any argument or proof, except bellyaching.

The play list was taken down, which indicates that the Swedish company agreed with the spurious accusation. This is wholly unexpected from a Swedish organisation, as Sweden is an innovator and leader when it comes to Politically Correct shenaningans. There isn’t much that Cory can do anyway. Spotify is a private company, and following this matter further in this case isn’t worth it. Spotify were able to enforce their own political ideology, and to use force to do so.

Here is where the lesson for Nationalists lies. It’s not in discovering that Social Justice Warriors engage in underhanded tactics and flagrant violations of reason and logic, this we already know and have copiously documented. It’s that spreading an ideology and defending it must use force and political violence. In this case, the call for the playlist to be removed and Spotify’s willing acquiescence demonstrates an exercise in low level political violence. Nationalists, Conservatives and the Right in general have been reluctant to use such tactics, preferring to rely on people coming to an awakening or realization independently through exposure to information and propaganda. But such a tactic simply cannot compete where force is involved on the opposing side. In this case, the artists and Spotify, have POWER which they can exercise to achieve their ends, which is protection of Leftist causes and silencing Conservative opposition. The reason the artists took to Twitter is precisely because they know they have power to defend Leftism, and can call upon those who hold power (Spotify) to act accordingly.

Nationalists have been more focused on message spreading, than in gaining power, and as such we don’t have competing mechanisms. Social Justice Warriors are able to use employers against us, use the media against us, but we can’t reciprocate the favour. We can’t because for decades we have been more focused on preparing demonstrations and propaganda than in seizing power and organizing amongst ourselves so we can coordinate use of such power. We were too focused on confronting Leftists in the streets and not in competing with Leftists for positions of power, or if not taking such positions personally, in influencing those who hold positions in which they make decisions in our favour. Quite simply, if some Social Justice Warrior created a playlist and this playlist was published under the name of an organization which wanted to change Australia Day and called the colonization of Australian an invasion, there is nothing we can do to take it down, because neither the artists, the company holding the playlist, is under any pressure to abide by our demands. Social and political domination usually trump physical domination.

It is here were we need to focus our efforts, in gaining positions of power and influence which we can call upon to use as a form of political and social “violence” against those who express ideas we find problematic. This might either be through denial of service where possible, or through boycotts and public calls to boycott products and companies. There are many who support our goals, and we need to use them to collectively make decisions which can make others hurt. Best of all, such actions are legal.

Tagged with:

3 Responses to Cory Bernardi, Spotify and future strategies

  1. Wight says:

    Absolutely spot on. Too much following the rules while the opposition obey none.

  2. Benjamin Taheny says:

    We need to create a White pages so that local Australian Nationalists and visting Nationalists from other White countries know which businesses to support and which to shun.
    Details such as: owner/s(and shareholders), employees, suppliers, and customers(if they offer vocal support to marginal identities – ones that don’t offer a viable future).

  3. natalt says:

    Nationalist Alternative is working on creating a network where like minded people can have a list of services/businesses that they can use which they know are supportive. At the moment, this isn’t something ‘public’, but we are working on it with conjuction with other groups/organisations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *