WWSUTRUTheWebOfLiesRevealed

← Back To Navigation

The Dragon’s Shadow: An Analysis of China’s Strategic Response to Neo-Nazism in the Australian Theatre

Section I: The Battlefield Survey: A Cast of Key Actors

To comprehend the strategic dynamics at play within the Australian theatre, it is imperative to first establish a comprehensive understanding of the key actors, their roles, and the conceptual frameworks that govern their interactions. The environment is not a simple binary of opposing forces but a complex ecosystem of individuals, organizations, and social factions operating within a broader, undeclared narrative conflict.

1.1 Individuals of Influence

• Thomas Sewell: The self-appointed and established leader of the National Socialist Network (NSN), Sewell functions as a primary domestic agent of social disruption.1 He is a recidivist violent actor with an extensive criminal record, including a prison sentence for a 2021 attack on hikers and a conviction for assaulting a security guard.1 At the time of the events in question, he was already on bail for other offenses.1 His public speeches, such as the one delivered at the “March for Australia” rally, articulate a violent vision and have specifically targeted Chinese-Australian communities, providing a direct vector for potential Chinese state media engagement that was ultimately not utilized.2
  
• Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: As the head of the Australian executive, Albanese is identified as the principal architect of the government’s strategic response to domestic extremism.1 His administration’s approach is defined by the doctrines of “Threat Triage” and “Compliance Management.” His public characterization of rally attendees as “good people” with “legitimate concerns” is analyzed not as a political misstep but as a sophisticated psychological operation designed to manage the allegiance of the uncommitted majority and preserve the government’s political power, even at the expense of long-term social cohesion.1

1.2 Organizational Actors

• National Socialist Network (NSN): A domestic neo-Nazi organization that serves as the primary instrument of social chaos in this case study. The NSN was directly linked to the anti-immigration rallies of August 31, 2025, and was responsible for the subsequent premeditated, violent assault on the Camp Sovereignty First Nations protest site.1 The group’s overt actions provide the raw material for the Minimisation Plan’s core propaganda narrative: “See how their freedom allows Nazis and extremists to roam the streets”.1 It is notable that the NSN has also engaged in protests outside the Chinese Consulate in Melbourne, indicating a complex posture that defies simple categorization as a foreign proxy.7
  
• Australian Government (Albanese Administration): The central actor whose response is under analysis. The government operates under a “Threat Triage” doctrine, responding with maximalist, punitive force to threats against the state apparatus (e.g., alleged subversion by the Iranian Regime) while adopting a permissive, managerial stance toward threats against the social fabric, such as the NSN.1 This permissive approach is identified as a functional enabler of the Minimisation Plan’s objectives, as it allows for the persistence of a chaotic social and informational environment that serves the narrative of democratic failure.1
  
• Chinese State Media Apparatus: This refers to the collective of state-controlled media outlets, including Xinhua, Global Times, People’s Daily, and China Daily. Its primary function is to execute the narrative warfare component of the Minimisation Plan. Its response to the specific events in Australia is characterized by a “strategic silence,” which stands in stark contrast to its persistent and high-volume thematic propaganda concerning general societal decay in other Western nations.8

1.3 Social Factions & Conceptual Frameworks

• The Compliant: The ideologically uncommitted majority of the population, identified as the center of gravity in the conflict for social control.1 The thousands who attended the “March for Australia” rallies are considered the physical embodiment of this demographic. Both the Australian government, through its “Compliance Management” strategy, and Minimiser actors are engaged in a constant struggle for their allegiance.1
  
• Minimisers & Maximisers: These are the opposing forces within the Minimisation Plan’s model of social dynamics. Minimisers, exemplified by the NSN, are defined by their strategic effect of destroying social cohesion and trust. Maximisers, analytically proxied by groups like the Australian Greens, are those who work to build and create “Greater Good” policies.6
  
• The Minimisation Plan: The designation for an observable, multi-decade grand strategy attributed to a Sino-Russian axis. Its objective is not military conquest but the systematic erosion of Western liberal democracies to make them appear unworkable.6 It operates through Delusionism—the philosophy of making objective facts irrelevant—and the manufacturing of crises to justify an authoritarian alternative.6 The events in Australia serve as a key case study of the Plan’s methodology.
  
• Threat Triage & Psochic Hegemony: These are the core analytical frameworks used to deconstruct the Australian government’s strategy. Threat Triage explains the logic behind the government’s differentiated responses to various threats, revealing a prioritization of the state over society.1 The Psochic Hegemony provides a model to map the
  deceptiveness of these responses, consistently identifying them as “Greater Lies”—actions framed for the public good that are, in reality, extractive and destructive to social cohesion.1

It is crucial to recognize that the analytical frameworks presented in the foundational documents are not neutral academic constructs. Their mission-oriented language—“The Mission: Uncovering the ‘Hum’”—indicates they are operational tools deployed by a counter-Minimiser faction.6 Therefore, these frameworks are not merely observing the battlefield of ideas; they are active participants, shaping the narrative by defining the actors, objectives, and terms of engagement. This report, by necessity, utilizes this lexicon to deconstruct the events, thereby participating in the very narrative conflict it seeks to analyze.

The following table provides a consolidated reference for the key actors and concepts that define this strategic environment.

Table 1.1: Cast of Actors in the Australian Theatre

Actor	Type	Role, Motivations, and Objectives	Key Relationships and Interactions
Thomas Sewell	Individual	Leader of the NSN; primary domestic agent of social disruption. Motivations include white supremacy and the creation of social chaos.	Leads the NSN; directly targeted by Victoria Police; his actions are permissively managed by the Albanese government.
Anthony Albanese	Individual	Prime Minister of Australia; architect of the “Threat Triage” doctrine. Objective is to maintain political power and state stability.	Leads the Australian government; implements “Compliance Management” to influence “The Compliant”; his strategy inadvertently serves the Minimisation Plan.
National Socialist Network (NSN)	Organization	Neo-Nazi group; instrument of social violence and division. Objective is to advance a white supremacist agenda.	Led by Sewell; their actions provide “evidence” for the Minimisation Plan’s narrative of democratic failure; has also protested the Chinese Consulate.
Australian Government	Organization	State apparatus. Prioritizes its own security and stability over the health of the domestic social fabric.	Led by Albanese; employs “Threat Triage” doctrine, responding differently to state threats (Iran) versus social threats (NSN).
Chinese State Media	Organization	Propaganda arm of the Chinese state. Objective is to execute the narrative warfare component of the Minimisation Plan.	Remains silent on specific Australian neo-Nazi events while amplifying a general “Narrative of Decay” about the West.
The Compliant	Social Faction	The ideologically uncommitted majority. They are the primary target in the struggle for social control.	Target of the Albanese government’s “Compliance Management” and the Minimisation Plan’s influence operations.
Minimisation Plan	Conceptual Framework	A grand strategy to erode Western democracies. Objective is to make democracy appear unworkable and promote authoritarianism.	Attributed to a Sino-Russian axis; leverages actors like the NSN and governmental responses like “Threat Triage” to achieve its goals.
Threat Triage	Conceptual Framework	The Australian government’s doctrine for prioritizing threats. It values state integrity over social cohesion.	Explains the disparity between the government’s punitive response to Iran and its permissive response to the NSN.

---

Section II: The Signal of Silence: China’s Direct Response to the ‘March for Australia’

An exhaustive analysis of the Chinese state’s media response to the neo-Nazi “March for Australia” and the subsequent attack on Camp Sovereignty reveals a strategy defined not by overt propaganda, but by a calculated and conspicuous absence thereof. This strategic silence, punctuated by a single, carefully calibrated media trace, functions as a sophisticated form of communication in itself.

2.1 Deconstruction of the Sole Media Trace: China Daily Asia

The only identifiable piece of coverage from a Chinese state-affiliated media outlet concerning the events of August 31, 2025, is a report from China Daily Asia.8 A forensic deconstruction of this article is revealing:

• Content and Tone: The article is a factual, agency-style report, devoid of original Chinese commentary, condemnation, or analysis. Its primary function is to report the Australian government’s own condemnation of the rallies. It prominently quotes senior minister Murray Watt’s statements that the rallies were intended to “spread hate” and were “organised and promoted by neo-Nazi groups”.8 The tone is neutral and detached, mirroring that of a Western wire service.
  
• Sourcing and Framing: The piece deliberately sources its information from Western outlets, including Sky News and the Australian Broadcasting Corp.8 This is a critical choice. By framing the news as a simple re-reporting of Australian sources, Beijing avoids making any direct accusations. The implicit message becomes, “Australia’s own government admits it has a Nazi problem,” a narrative far more potent and defensible than a direct accusation from China.
  
• Platform and Audience: The choice of platform is equally significant. China Daily Asia is an English-language publication aimed primarily at an international, business, and diplomatic audience located outside of mainland China. It is not a primary vehicle for domestic propaganda or nationalist mobilization in the way that outlets like People’s Daily or the Global Times are.

2.2 Analysis of the Information Vacuum

The most significant data point regarding China’s response is the information vacuum. Extensive searches for coverage from primary mainland propaganda outlets—including Xinhua, Global Times, and People’s Daily—regarding the “March for Australia,” Thomas Sewell, or the Camp Sovereignty attack yielded no results.14 This absence cannot be interpreted as an oversight. Given the direct targeting of the Chinese-Australian community by the rally’s speakers, this silence is a deliberate strategic decision.2 The Minimisation Plan primer notes Australia’s unique position as a Western democracy whose economy is deeply intertwined with China.6 An overtly inflammatory propaganda campaign, similar to those waged against the United States, could jeopardize this crucial economic relationship, a risk evidenced by recent tensions over investment screening.17

The decision to confine the response to a single, neutral report in an external-facing publication, while keeping the powerful domestic propaganda machinery silent, represents a sophisticated, multi-layered strategy. This approach allows Beijing to signal to international diplomatic and intelligence communities that it is aware of the event and the racist targeting of its diaspora, without being drawn into a direct and potentially costly diplomatic confrontation. It maintains plausible deniability and preserves operational flexibility, keeping the option open to either amplify or ignore similar events in the future depending on the geopolitical climate. In this context, the Chinese response was not a “cover” for active involvement, but rather a low-cost, low-risk, passive intelligence and signaling operation. It was a choice to observe and record the event’s corrosive effect on the Australian social fabric rather than to actively shape it with a direct propaganda campaign.

---

Section III: A Pattern of Omission: Timeline and Frequency Analysis

Broadening the analytical aperture from the specific Australian incident to China’s general coverage of Western extremism reveals a clear and consistent pattern. The strategic silence regarding Australia is not an isolated event but a stark anomaly when contrasted with the high-volume, high-intensity narrative warfare waged against the United States and the European Union. This demonstrates a highly targeted, geopolitically motivated deployment of propaganda.

3.1 High-Volume Coverage of US Social Decay

Chinese state media outlets such as Xinhua and China News Service publish frequent, in-depth, and highly critical articles detailing systemic failures within the United States. This coverage is not sporadic but forms a continuous, thematic drumbeat. Key narratives include:

• Racial Hatred: Articles consistently frame the U.S. as a nation being “torn apart” by racial hatred. They cite rising hate crimes, systemic police brutality against minorities (with the George Floyd case being a recurring example), and a growing rejection of national symbols as evidence of a society in collapse.18
  
• Political Polarization & “Democratic Chaos”: A cornerstone of this propaganda is the narrative that “American-style democracy” is a failed model. Reports focus on partisan gridlock, political violence such as the January 6th Capitol riot, and a widespread loss of faith in democratic institutions to portray the American system as fundamentally broken.9
  
• Wealth Disparity: The widening gap between rich and poor is presented as another vector of societal collapse, an inherent failure of capitalism that fuels social unrest and proves the system’s injustice.21

3.2 Consistent Coverage of European Far-Right Resurgence

Similarly, outlets like the Global Times regularly report on the rise of far-right political parties across Europe, including in Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, and Finland.10 The framing here is slightly different but serves a similar strategic purpose:

• Systemic Weakness: The resurgence of the far-right is portrayed as a symptom of the European Union’s inherent structural weaknesses. This narrative links the rise of these parties to the EU’s inability to manage economic crises, the migrant crisis, and the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic.10
  
• Erosion of Unity: The coverage emphasizes how these parties leverage anti-immigrant and anti-EU sentiment to gain power, thereby threatening the stability and coherence of the entire European project and, by extension, the transatlantic alliance.26

3.3 The Australian Anomaly

The near-total absence of similar thematic coverage focused on Australia’s documented far-right problem is the critical anomaly. Despite clear and public evidence of a growing, violent, and politically active neo-Nazi movement—including the NSN’s public marches, violent assaults, and infiltration of political parties—Chinese state media refrains from weaponizing this issue in the same manner it does with American and European examples.1

This differentiated approach reveals that China’s narrative warfare is not a monolithic sledgehammer of general anti-Western criticism. It is a geopolitical scalpel, applied with precision and varying intensity based on the target nation’s strategic importance. The United States, as China’s primary geopolitical rival, is subjected to a maximalist narrative assault designed to degrade its global standing and challenge its model of governance. The European Union, a key economic partner but also a potential strategic competitor, is targeted with narratives designed to exploit internal divisions and weaken its alignment with the U.S. Australia, however, represents a different calculus: it is a firm U.S. ally but also a critical and deeply integrated economic partner, particularly as a supplier of essential resources.6 A full-scale, U.S.-style propaganda campaign against Australia would risk damaging this vital economic relationship. The strategic silence is therefore a deliberate geopolitical calculation, prioritizing the stability of its economic interests over the short-term propaganda victory that could be scored by highlighting the NSN’s activities.

The following matrix visually represents this stark disparity in media strategy.

Table 3.1: Comparative Media Coverage Matrix (Far-Right Extremism, 2020-2025)

Target Nation	Volume of Coverage	Primary Themes & Framing
USA	High	Systemic Collapse: “Democratic Chaos,” “Racial Hatred Tearing Society Apart,” “Failed State,” “Broken System.”
EU Nations	Medium	Internal Fragmentation: “Rise of Far-Right,” “Anti-Immigrant Sentiment,” “Threat to EU Unity,” “Populist Wave.”
Australia	None / Minimal	Strategic Silence: A single, neutral, agency-style report on a state-affiliated, external-facing platform. No thematic coverage in primary domestic outlets.

---

Section IV: The Minimiser’s Mirror: Strategic Projection and the Narrative of Decay

While China’s state media remained silent on the specific neo-Nazi events in Australia, its broader propaganda ecosystem is perfectly calibrated to amplify the general “Narrative of Decay,” a core tactic of the Minimisation Plan. This narrative functions through a powerful psychological mechanism: strategic projection. The accusations leveled against the West are often a direct mirror of the Minimisation Plan’s own intentions and actions, a method designed to create cognitive dissonance and achieve a state of “Delusionism.”

4.1 Deconstructing the “Narrative of Decay”

The Minimisation Plan primer explicitly outlines the tactic of “manufactured justification”: Minimiser agents actively cultivate and amplify societal failures within democracies, and then their propaganda arms present these manufactured crises as evidence of the democratic system’s inherent weakness.6 Chinese media articles execute this strategy with precision, focusing relentlessly on themes of chaos, division, and decay in the West. These reports are the second stage of the operation: they report on the “evidence” that the Plan’s covert influence campaigns helped to create.

4.2 Case Studies in Strategic Projection

A direct comparison between the Minimisation Plan’s stated tactics and the narratives deployed by Chinese state media reveals a consistent pattern of strategic projection.

• Projection 1: Accusation of Democratic Failure.
  • Minimiser Tactic: “Look how their democracy creates evil and corrupt leaders… making democracy appear chaotic, corrupt, and ultimately unworkable”.6
    
  • Chinese Media Narrative: An article from China News Service describes “American-style democracy” as suffering from a “governance failure,” citing intense partisan fighting, political polarization, and violent events like the storming of the Capitol as definitive proof that the system is fundamentally broken and unstable.9
    
  • Analysis: This narrative projects the Minimisation Plan’s objective (to make democracy appear unworkable) as an already existing, organic state of being within the target nation. The media reports on the symptoms of the disease that the Plan itself is actively trying to spread.
    
• Projection 2: Accusation of Fostering Extremism.
  • Minimiser Tactic: “See how their freedom allows Nazis and extremists to roam the streets” (while using information warfare to amplify extremist voices and fan the flames of racial hatred, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy).6
    
  • Chinese Media Narrative: A Xinhua feature details how “racial hatred tears America apart,” focusing on the rise of hate crimes and the formation of white supremacist militias.18 Another piece argues that the George Floyd incident “ignited” America’s deep-seated racial contradictions, leading to widespread social unrest.19
    
  • Analysis: This is a direct execution of the Minimiser script. The media reports on the visible manifestation of extremism, framing it as an inherent and unavoidable flaw of a free and open society. It conveniently omits the role of external influence campaigns in amplifying those very extremist voices. The Australian case, where the government’s own permissive inaction allows the “fire” of extremism to burn, serves as a perfect real-world example of this principle, even without direct Chinese amplification of the specific event.
    
• Projection 3: Accusation of Israeli “Neo-Nazism”.
  • Chinese Media Narrative: A Voice of America report notes that in the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack, one of the most-liked comments on an Israeli consulate’s social media post in China read: “Down with Jewish terrorism and Israeli neo-Nazism”.32
    
  • Analysis: This is a potent and extreme example of narrative inversion and Delusionism. The term “Nazi” is deliberately stripped of its historical meaning and projected onto the Jewish state itself. This tactic serves to create maximum cognitive dissonance and epistemic nihilism, perfectly aligning with the Minimisation Plan’s ultimate goal of making “the very concept of ‘facts’ irrelevant”.6

This consistent mirroring between the tactics described in the Minimisation Plan primer and the narratives deployed by Chinese state media is not coincidental. It is a core mechanism of Delusionism. By accusing an adversary of doing precisely what one is doing or intends to do, it confuses attribution, muddies the informational environment, and preemptively neutralizes counter-accusations by framing them as mere “whataboutism.” This creates a feedback loop: the Plan’s actions help generate real-world chaos, and the state media then reports on this chaos as “proof” that its initial critique of democracy was correct all along. The “Narrative of Decay” is not just propaganda; it is an integral weapon in a broader strategic warfare doctrine.

Table 4.1: Minimiser Themes & Strategic Projection Matrix

Minimiser Tactic/Narrative 6	Exemplar Chinese Media Narrative (with Quote)	Analysis of Strategic Projection
“Look how their democracy creates evil and corrupt leaders.”	China News Service 9: “For a period of time, the disorder of social governance in the United States has been dazzling to the world, and all kinds of chaos reflect a series of structural problems of ‘American-style democracy’.”	Projects the Plan’s goal of creating chaos as an inherent, existing failure of the democratic system itself.
“See how their freedom allows Nazis and extremists to roam the streets.”	Xinhua 18: “These numbers reveal that racism is an endemic disease in American society… Racism not only brings great pain to American ethnic minorities, but also further exacerbates the tearing of American society.”	Reports on the existence of extremism as an organic outcome of freedom, validating the Minimiser narrative while omitting the role of external amplification.
Making “the very concept of ‘facts’ irrelevant” (Delusionism).	Social Media 32: A top comment on an Israeli consulate post in China reads, “Down with Jewish terrorism and Israeli neo-Nazism”.	A perfect example of narrative inversion. The term “Nazi” is projected onto its historical victims to create maximum cognitive dissonance and destroy meaning.

---

Section V: Synthesis and Assessment: The Symbiosis of Inaction

The cumulative evidence does not support the hypothesis that China’s response to the Australian neo-Nazi events was a “generated cover.” A cover implies an attempt to hide active involvement. The evidence points instead to a deliberate lack of direct involvement in the narrative space surrounding this specific incident. The strategy was not to cover tracks, but to leave no tracks in the first place. This approach reveals something far more sophisticated: a strategy of opportunistic observation that leverages the Australian government’s own domestic political strategy, creating a symbiotic relationship that quietly advances the Minimisation Plan’s ultimate objectives.

5.1 The Symbiotic Reinforcement Loop

A symbiotic reinforcement loop has been established between the domestic political strategy of the Australian government and the geopolitical strategy of the Chinese state.

1. Australian Government Action: The Albanese government, guided by its “Threat Triage” doctrine, employs a strategy of permissive inaction and “Compliance Management” towards the NSN. This choice is driven by domestic political calculations: a desire to avoid alienating “The Compliant,” the uncommitted voters who attended the rallies.1 The strategic
   effect, however, is that a violent extremist group is permitted to operate publicly, actively creating social division and providing a real-world proof-of-concept for the Minimisation Plan’s narrative of democratic failure.
   
2. Chinese Government Action: The Chinese state, in turn, employs “Strategic Silence” on this specific Australian incident, thereby avoiding diplomatic friction and protecting its vital economic relationship. Simultaneously, it maintains its global “Narrative of Decay,” using events like the NSN’s activities (but sourced from the U.S. and EU) as general, non-specific proof of broad Western decline.10
   
3. The Symbiosis: The Australian government’s inaction creates the raw material—the “permissible fire” of extremism—that validates the Minimisation Plan’s global narrative. China does not need to risk a direct and costly propaganda campaign against Australia because the Australian government’s own strategy is already degrading its domestic social fabric, achieving the Minimisation Plan’s objective by proxy. As the foundational analysis concludes, the state is preserved, but society is degraded—the ultimate goal of the Plan.1

5.2 Mapping the Strategy on the Psochic Hegemony

When mapped on the Psochic Hegemony framework, the deceptive nature of both strategies becomes quantifiable.

• The Australian government’s response is a classic “Greater Lie.” It is framed as a proactive (+ψ) move for the “Greater Good” (+υ) of maintaining social harmony and preventing radicalization. However, its true function is profoundly extractive (−υ), sacrificing the safety and security of minority communities for the government’s narrow political goal of managing a key demographic.1
  
• China’s broader media strategy is also a “Greater Lie.” It is framed as objective reporting (+ψ) for the “Greater Good” (+υ) of informing its audience about world events. Its true function is extractive (−υ), designed to erode global trust in democratic systems and advance its own authoritarian model. The significant distance between the framed intent and the true effect is a direct measure of the strategy’s dishonesty.11

5.3 Strategic Patience and the Efficiency of Leveraging Internal Decay

The Minimisation Plan, as demonstrated in this Australian case study, reveals a highly efficient and patient methodology. It expends minimal direct resources on influencing the Australian information space, instead allowing Australia’s own internal political dynamics and strategic choices to produce the desired outcome. The Australian government’s “Threat Triage” doctrine is a known vulnerability; the government has publicly signaled it will not act decisively against this type of social threat.1 Therefore, the most efficient strategy for the Minimisation Plan is to simply allow this internal process of decay to play out.

This demonstrates the “rhizomatic” nature of the conflict described in the primer: the Plan does not require a central command directing every action; it spreads by exploiting and nourishing existing weaknesses within the target system.6 The domestic political strategy of the Australian government and the geopolitical strategy of the Chinese government align perfectly in their outcome: the managed degradation of Australian social cohesion.

The most significant threat is not always a direct attack, but the subtle, patient exploitation of a nation’s own internal contradictions. The Chinese response is a masterclass in strategic patience, demonstrating that sometimes the most powerful move is to do nothing and allow an adversary’s own choices to lead toward their decline. The silence was not an absence of strategy; the silence was the strategy.

Works cited

1. Analyzing Australia’s Neo-Nazi Response
   
2. Thousands rally against immigration with neo-Nazis taking the spotlight | SBS News, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/podcast-episode/thousands-rally-against-immigration-with-neo-nazis-taking-the-spotlight/amfab4ulu
   
3. Thomas Sewell (neo-Nazi) - Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sewell_(neo-Nazi)
   
4. Neo-Nazis attack Indigenous protest site after anti-immigration rally in Melbourne as officer allegedly assaulted in Sydney - The Guardian, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/sep/01/neo-nazis-attack-camp-sovereignty-indigenous-site-melbourne-anti-immigration-protest-police-injured-sydney-ntwnfb
   
5. A neo-Nazi group has violently assaulted people at a First Nations protest site | SBS NITV, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/a-neo-nazi-group-has-violently-assaulted-a-first-nations-sacred-site/zgy2xfq7h
   
6. The Minimisation Plan: An Investigative Primer
   
7. National Socialist Network - Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Network
   
8. Australia government condemns anti-immigration rally in Sydney, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.chinadailyasia.com/article/618939
   
9. “美式民主”快速跌下神坛-中国新闻网, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.chinanews.com/m/gj/2021/11-25/9615828.shtml
   
10. 极右翼在欧洲崛起是欧盟面临挑战的警告信号 - 中共中央对外联络部, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.idcpc.gov.cn/wdzs/sjzd/202308/t20230802_161133.html
    
11. A Framework for the Judgment of Ideas
    
12. Standard Operating Procedures for Investigating the Minimisation Plan
    
13. Thousands in Australia rally against immigration, government condemns rally, accessed September 6, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/nri/latest-updates/thousands-in-australia-rally-against-immigration-government-condemns-rally/articleshow/123620359.cms
    
14. Thousands join rallies against mass immigration across Australia - Yahoo News UK, accessed September 6, 2025, https://uk.news.yahoo.com/thousands-join-rallies-against-mass-111920662.html
    
15. Neo-Nazi charged over attack; Vehicle carjacked with child still inside | 9 News Australia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1BXgw7HOF0
    
16. Who’s going to stand up and make Nazis ashamed again? - The Australia Institute, accessed September 6, 2025, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/whos-going-to-stand-up-and-make-nazis-ashamed-again/
    
17. Australia PM Albanese, at Great Wall, defends foreign investment screening, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/australianz/australia-pm-albanese-at-great-wall-defends-foreign-investment-screening
    
18. 特稿：种族仇恨撕裂美国-新华网, accessed September 6, 2025, http://www.news.cn/world/2021-10/28/c_1128005002.htm
    
19. 述评：“三大矛盾”撕裂美国社会-新华网, accessed September 6, 2025, http://www.xinhuanet.com/world/2020-06/25/c_1126160409.htm
    
20. 新华社特稿：种族仇恨撕裂美国 - 新浪军事, accessed September 6, 2025, https://mil.sina.cn/2021-10-28/detail-iktzscyy2247485.d.html?from=wap
    
21. 新华时评：贫富分化“撕裂”美国社会_习近平外交思想和新时代中国外交, accessed September 6, 2025, http://cn.chinadiplomacy.org.cn/2023-02/24/content_85125338.shtml
    
22. 新华时评：贫富分化“撕裂”美国社会 - 中国江苏网, accessed September 6, 2025, https://news.jschina.com.cn/scroll/szyw/202302/t20230224_3169133.shtml
    
23. 新华时评：贫富分化“撕裂”美国社会 - 中青在线, accessed September 6, 2025, http://m.cyol.com/gb/articles/2023-02/24/content_4wz34BSWlw.html
    
24. 【环时深度】极右翼政党掀“政治海啸”，欧洲何去何从？ - 国际新闻, accessed September 6, 2025, https://world.huanqiu.com/article/49lThbSAQG8
    
25. 《环球时报》：（赵永升）极右翼政党掀“政治海啸”，欧洲何去何从？ - 对外经济贸易大学新闻网, accessed September 6, 2025, https://news.uibe.edu.cn/info/1371/52179.htm
    
26. 欧洲一体化进程中极右政党的崛起及其社会影响, accessed September 6, 2025, https://eu.lzu.edu.cn/ueditor/php/upload/file/20211208/1638932585787173.pdf
    
27. 《环球时报》：简军波：环球圆桌对话：跨大西洋“右翼共振”对欧洲意味着什么？, accessed September 6, 2025, https://iis.fudan.edu.cn/0b/8a/c6893a723850/page.htm
    
28. 七国集团峰会召开之际，欧洲右翼抬头或推动欧盟加快去风险战略 - 美国之音, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.voachinese.com/a/g7-amid-rise-of-right-wings-in-eu-china-policy/7656422.html
    
29. Far-right politics in Australia - Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics_in_Australia
    
30. Clashes in Australia’s Melbourne as thousands rally against immigration - Al Jazeera, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/1/clashes-in-australias-melbourne-as-thousands-rally-against-immigration
    
31. Inquiry into right wing extremist movements in Australia Submission to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=ff959b90-a30c-4257-98f2-76e4a8e9d9ab&subId=755135
    
32. 以色列哈马斯冲突，中国社媒上为何反犹太情绪高涨？ - 美国之音, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.voachinese.com/a/china-israel-jews-20231010/7305010.html