Nation First by George Christensen is a reader-supported publication defending our sovereignty and democratic, free way of life. Consider becoming a supporter today!
Defend freedom. Become a paid subscriber.
Nation First berates the Australian Government for using children as an excuse to further censorship and the surveillance state.
Dear friend,
Welcome to Australia, where watching The Wiggles on YouTube is now considered a threat to child safety, but hardcore pornography remains just a click away, no ID required.
Nation First, by George Christensen is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
- The government banned YouTube for under-16s, but left porn sites open.
- Julie Inman Grant leads a crackdown that swaps freedom for control.
- Kids lose a key space to create, share, and learn online.
- Age checks are just a step towards mass digital surveillance.
- This policy isn’t about safety; it’s about power.
By GEORGE CHRISTENSEN
SO the Albanese government has added YouTube to its under-16 social media ban, reversing its earlier decision and caving to the bureaucratic crusade led by eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant. Their rationale? A vague and unproven claim that YouTube poses “algorithmic harms” to children.
This is coming from Julie Inman Grant, a former Microsoft lobbyist turned digital nanny who has become notorious for demanding mass content removals and pushing tech policies she clearly doesn’t understand. Her “solutions” consistently trade freedom for bureaucratic control, and she has made a career out of turning fear into authority.
Let’s be clear. Social media overexposure is a legitimate concern. But policing screen time is not the job of government, it is the job of parents. And the more we rely on state intervention to raise our kids, the more we end up with exactly what the system wants: a generation of woke, screen-addicted, authority-worshipping ideologues.
And here’s what they won’t admit. This doesn’t just ban consumption, it bans creation. Young Australians building channels, sharing art, posting music, reviewing books, all of that is gone. The ban isn’t protecting kids; it is erasing their voices and gutting a massive creative outlet.
And while YouTube now faces age verification, sites like YouPorn, PornHub, and every degenerate corner of the open web remain wide open to minors. That’s not a child safety policy. That’s political theatre. Actually, it’s worse than that; it’s a smokescreen for censorship and surveillance. If this were truly about protecting children, Albanese would be cracking down on porn first, not educational videos and music channels.
And while the government insists kids can still view videos while “logged out,” that strips away the very safety tools they claim to care about. No parental controls, no watch history, no filters. It’s a half-baked workaround that actually makes things less safe while giving politicians cover.
But that’s not the real agenda, is it? What we’re staring down is a future where watching a how-to video on fixing a leaky tap will require the same ID scrutiny as boarding a domestic flight. Scan your face to watch cat videos? That’s not a punchline anymore. It’s policy in progress.
This ban isn’t about keeping kids safe. It is about laying the groundwork for censorship and surveillance across every corner of the internet. Today it is “age verification.” Tomorrow it is biometric logins. After that, it is the complete de-anonymisation of every online account in Australia.
If you think that’s far-fetched, look at the UK. Since they rolled out similar laws, access to political commentary outside the mainstream now often requires ID. Want to watch a podcast criticising government COVID policy? You’ll need to sign in. Want to view a video questioning the gender agenda in schools? Welcome to the national database, comrade.
And don’t think it ends there.
That once-anonymous X account of yours, the one where you posted, “Men can’t be women”? Soon enough, that will be tied directly to your ID, your location, and your IP address. When the thought police come knocking at your door, you won’t be shocked. You’ll remember this day. The day they told you it was about “protecting the kids.”
It’s not about protection. It’s about power.
We are sleepwalking into a future where free speech is licensed, where browsing the internet requires a permission slip, and where your digital fingerprints are stamped on everything you read, say, or share.
Still think it’s about social media? Here’s what needs to happen. Parents must step up. We need to stop outsourcing morality and discipline to the same government that can’t define a woman. We must demand freedom for families, privacy for citizens, and accountability for this creeping surveillance state masquerading as public safety.
Albanese tried to sell this policy flanked by grieving parents, a raw emotional spectacle staged to shield his government from criticism. But exploiting heartbreak doesn’t make bad law righteous. It just makes it manipulative. The government doesn’t get to decide what your family watches.
As communications academic Catherine Jane Archer warned, “Young people will be cut off from a huge creative outlet, and from social and political commentary.” The ban doesn’t just muzzle toxic content. It muzzles all content. Every teen with a guitar, a Bible, or a political opinion just got silenced by Canberra.
And it’s not even consistent. The government’s own research shows grooming, harassment, and image-based abuse are more common on platforms like Snapchat, yet those services get a free pass. Why? Because this isn’t about risk. It is about narrative control.
Stand your ground. Resist the ID regime and surveillance state as much as you can. And parent like your child’s freedom depends on it, because it does.
Until next time, God bless you, your family and nation.
Nation First, by George Christensen is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Upgrade to paid
