XYZ Live #54 – One Nation Drama, the Australian Protectionist Party and a very special guest!


Last nigh we had Bradley from the Australian Protectionist Party as our special guest. Topics covered included:

  • The history, goals and platform of the Australian Protectionist Party.
  • One Nation’s slide into cuckery.
  • Peter Grace, aka Captain Potato, aka Captain Incontinence, gets triggered by a Matty’s Modern Life video.

One of Matty’s Modern Life’s favourite characters joined us to share the mirth at the Potatard’s expense.


  • “cuckery”

    Please explain.

    The Yanks never did learn how to swear, and this trans-Pacific patois doesn’t survive the crossing.
    It has no place on an Australian website.

  • Bucky Redux

    Who is this Captain Underpants/Potato guy ?
    Can you get him to jump on as a guest the next Live Stream you do ?
    He can do a comedy segment.

    • Mattys Modern Life

      That’s Potato Pete, failed radio star.

  • James

    Had a glance at the APP page. Nah. Too many specks that look like poo in that sandwich.
    Standard dot point list of policy areas like they all do, I only quickly looked at a couple and didn’t notice anything specific about property rights. There may have been but I didn’t spot it.
    They’ve put up an “Environment” policy that mentions “sustainable” something or something. That’s a non starter for me. Too familiar with the “sustainable” caveat meaning an open door for all and sundry to stick their nose in other peoples plans.
    Then looked at their “Firearms” policy since Matty asked the question. That one’s always a good litmus test.
    They’re all for Licensing! And for police issuing and withdrawing approvals!! And background checks, which with licensing sounds like reverse onus!!! Damn these guys are for the state as master.
    There are places for licensing. We have a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle in a public place. That’s ok. It’s shared space and demonstrated competence requirements are reasonable for safety.
    We don’t require a license to “own” a car, or to operate one on private space. There’s no “character” test, nor should there be. If we’re going to deny ownership of things it must be subject to just process. The onus must be on the refuser to justify their position and it must be through a competent court. That goes for anything. Otherwise we’re not free individuals, only subjects to the whims of others.

    Sorry to rant but why do so few “get it”?