Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
 
 
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
 
 
Home Blog Freedom Potentials The Cross Roads Veritas Books
Newtimes Survey Podcast Archive Video Archive PDF Archive
Actionist Corner YouTube Video Channel BitChute Video Channel Brighteon Video Channel Social Credit Archive

On Target Britain

Food for Thought: Selfish individuals employ democratic forms of parliamentarianism to make the "state" an executive organ of their own business interests, "that is, by paying for election campaigns and newspapers and thus controlling the opinion of voters and readers". Thus democracy, in general, is an un-holy alliance of urban masses, cosmopolitan intellectuals, and finance capitalists. The masses themselves are manipulated by the latter two elements through their specific agencies; the press and the parties. The intelligentsia represent "abstract intelligence", not spiritual enlightenment, while the finance capitalists are supported by mobile fortunes distinct from the landed property of the true nobility. In fact, the League of Nations, the forerunner of our United Nations, is itself an instrument of big business, and is "in reality a system of provinces and protectorates whose popu-lations are being exploited by a business oligarchy with the aid of bribed parliaments and purchased laws".

The Scorpion, Winter 2000/2001


PATHS TO POWER AND DECAY
Published in 2 parts - Part 1

Vol. 34 No. 23 & 24
14th & 28th May, 2005

Haunting Images And Ominous Changes

In the United Kingdom we have just emerged from a General Election that took place on 5th May, 2005. It was a campaign waged on cynical, opportunist party-political manoeuvring and position taking, lies, meaningless pledges, decades of broken promises and moral decline. So mark well the extract in "Food For Thought". This is taken from one of a series of articles dealing with the German Cultural Revolution. The article was headed "German Socialism as an Alternative to Marxism". Such searching analytical debate, whilst circulated world-wide through publi-cations such as The Scorpion, only reaches a limited audience, despite dealing with far reaching topics that rightly ought to enjoy a much wider and serious public interest. Contrast this with the trash that is being ped-dled to the public at large through the gutter press, much of the broadsheet press, and popular television; abetted by the diversionary entertainment of commercialised "sport" from darts and snooker to horse racing. The ex-tract in question was drawn from Oswald Spengler's The Decline of the West(1). Significantly this was written almost 80 years ago, in 1926, and debated the options for governance between the hereditary, the monarchic and the parliamentary. The theme embraced the erosion of the meta-physical (abstract, philosophical) finesse of the European mind, and the descent to materialism, rationalism and opposition to national cultures and to the "natural, hierarchical and autarchical ordering of European society". To paraphrase the author of "German Socialism as an Alternative to Marx-ism", Dr Alexander Jacob, this process also embraced the influence of liberal democracy and fostering of intellectual and social dissatisfaction in such a way as to benefit and perpetuate a sterile commercial existence as an international power; the materialistic rationalism that has seeped into every pore of European society at the expense of moral integrity, conservatism and organic spiritual creativity and cultural achievement.


From 1926 to 2005. What can one say of what might glibly be dismissed as philosophical ramblings from a bygone era? "Food For Thought", regardless of the age from which it has been taken, rings un-comfortably true today, when we live in a greatly emancipated society that basks in the benefits of a sociological and technological revolution; of individual "Rights", fast food, advanced medicine and insatiable material-istic demands on diminishing natural resources and a vanishing natural environment. The philosophical debate of Spengler and his contempor-aries has come down to earth with a bang. Many so-called popular public figures, products of decades of degradation of the English language in education and society at large, appear incapable of communicating without the repetitive use of terms like "brilliant", "fantastic", "stress", "stressful" and even the "F" word. Only recently we read a bold headline in a leading broadsheet that children were too busy playing on the "consuls" (consoles!) of their computer games. Young housewives pushing prams and even small children walk the streets glued to mobile telephones. We already have reports of pressure for cosmetic surgery for teenage girls. Now we read in a newspaper of one 15-year-old girl who felt "agitated and stressed" when deprived of her mobile telephone for a few days. . The Daily Mail of 16th May, 2005 reports a trend for "makeovers at five, facials at eight"in what are termed "Baby Spas".

The decay alluded to by Spengler, borne on a "carrier wave" of Political Correctness, has resulted in a proposal to award compensatory bonus marks in G.C.S.E. and A-level examinations for the stress involved in, for example, the loss of a pet animal. We may invoke Spengler's The Decline of the West to recognise how widespread and contagious - not to say deliberately induced - these seemingly inexorable changes in society in the West generally are. The 19th November, 2004, Australian edition of On Target opened with the title "Yet Another Inquiry Into The Education System", and continued to outline the way the "wheel" of Education has repeatedly been questioned and re-invented, the progressive consequences of which were perfectly well known as early as 1970:

The on-going issue of too many students leaving school unable competently to read and write has surfaced once again. This time the Federal Coalition has launched a national inquiry into how children learn to read. . . . How far back in the history of Education in Australia will the inquiry go? More impor-tantly, will the inquiry delve into the powerful forces who, 50 years ago, brought about such dramatic changes in the philoso-phy, policies and practices of Education in this country?

The 22nd April, 2005 edition of the Australian On Target continued the theme with an article by James Reed that opened with the heading "Subverting Education: A Conspiracy to Dumb Us Down". Having castigated the "commercialisation" of Australian universities at the expense of academic fundamentals, he continued:


The second source of decadence and degeneracy in the modern university radiates from the humanities and social ser-vices departments [many times echoed in the case of the United Kingdom - Ed.]. This source is so well known and documented that insightful articles about the decline can be found even in our daily papers. Anne McIlroy, head of the English Department at Genazanno F.C.S. College in Melbourne in an article "Who's for Shakespeare?" (The Australian, 10th February, 2005), informs us that English literature study, rather than encouraging interaction with the great works of the West, now simply supports the new class ideology of the Left - feminism, social criticism and "deconstructionism". No longer can Shakespeare's works be considered "great", supplying insights into the human condition. Rather, Shakespeare is considered a racist, Euro-centric and patriarchal. Students, in accordance with the literary philosophy of "deconstructionism" are encouraged to consider all texts as equal, just as all men are, allegedly, equal under Leftist ideology. "Thus the "Queer eye for the straight guy" and "Sex in the City", truly horrible television programmes, rank alongside - and maybe "above" (contradictorily) Macbeth and Hamlet. Goethe is out and garbage is in.

The Seeds And Stench Of Conspiracy


Has the World Revolution of Karl Marx - Communism - served the interests of the Ruling Elite? Does it continue to do so in whatever form it may take today? We have no doubt that this is so on both counts. Revolutions, such as those that broke out across Europe in 1848 cannot easily occur without finance and connivance in the right places. One may envisage this interaction as a fast moving ball deflected and accelerated in a chosen direction by a Ruling Elite seeking to capitalise on this insurrection that will inevitably weaken the middle classes, the bourgeoisie, and the intelligentsia, many of whom will be the source of this destabilisation in the first place. We have written of the "correct position" taken by Ministers in the second Government of Prime Minister Blair, exactly in accordance with Marxist-Leninist Doctrine, in that the truth is that which it is required to be(2). The key to this is the Ideological Struggle of Marxism-Leninism. This is undertaken as and when the Armed Struggle - military action - is tactically or strategically inappropriate. Formal study of the means and methods of destabilising Western society commenced with the foundation of the Institute for Social Research at Frankfurt am Main, in 1923. Thus began the long slow process of infil-tration through the universities, the church, education and other influential sectors of society. An important element of the Ideological Struggle is Political Correctness (P.C.), which has a public face in the manner of pustules on social skin if one cares to recognise it. Political Correctness was raised as an election issue by the Conservative Party during the recent election campaign, but was quickly and conveniently forgotten. When one Conservative politician had spoken eloquently on the serious menace of Political Correctness, he was asked if he was aware of the origins of Political Correctness and the work of Dr Frank Ellis of Leeds University, who has a detailed knowledge of the subject. He was not, which does not auger well for any political process.

Moral Rot - Social Self-Scrutiny



We might well have continued this sub-title "before it is too late", and here we can do no more than scratch the surface of the crisis of hedonistic human self-interest in the West, from baby spas to poodle parlours to contraceptives for 10-year-olds in a promotional climate of surging illegitimacy. Evidence of this great soft social and moral "under-belly" of society today, the erosion of traditional cultural values by materialist rationalism is everywhere. That somebody should be prepared to pay £294,000 at Christies, in New York, for a guitar once played by the Beatles, is but another example of these distortions. We have watched as the Viagra drug, initially marketed by the powerful pharmaceutical con-glomerate, Pfizer, as an aid to the fading libido of the elderly, was later deftly promoted, with the aid of youthful images, as a sexual panacea for younger generations. We now read in the Daily Mail of 2nd March, 2005, that "We spend more on Viagra than on drugs for dementia". So what kind of nation have we become? Progressive commercialisation of sport has "aquaplaned" over the public consciousness largely unnoticed. The public flock regularly to the collective hysteria of football league matches bet-ween teams comprising many imported players only nominally identifiable with the towns and cities they purport to represent.

On 5th May, 2005, the letters page of The Daily Telegraph included a batch of correspondence under the heading "Let us spend our money on health, not on D.V.D. players". Hospital consultants have frequently been targeted for making a profitable income from private practice. Gerald Caplan, writing to The Daily Telegraph on 13th April, 2005, questioned these values:

I was delighted to read that 50 per cent of G.Ps. (Gen-eral Practitioners) now earn an annual salary which is less than [football star] Rio Ferdinand's weekly wage. I am sure society has its values right.


During the same period we were informed that thieves had raided the £8,000,000 Chelsea home of £90,000 a week football star Frank Lampard and his fiancé. We also read of a Christening "bash" at the home of soccer star David Beckham and his wife "Posh Spice" Victoria, and that this had been attended by a bevy of "celebrities" such as "Sir" Elton John and his boy friend, Elizabeth Hurley, pop "idols" and others. There are those who may wish to take note, including hospital consultants, general practitioners, senior police and fire officers, university lecturers, senior army officers serving in Iraq and elsewhere along with a host of others; not least on behalf of the thousands who serve under them. In December, 2004, images of "Posh" and "Becks" were featured at Madame Tussauds in a nativity tableau. This was described by former Labour Minister Lord Hattersley in the Daily Mail as "Tawdry and vulgar - a nativity that defines our shallow age". When we recall the party political posturing of successive general elections and calls for higher standards in society, we might care to contemplate the words of Rodney Atkinson in The Sunday Telegraph of 22nd May, 2005:

So [the Rt Hon.; Member of Parliament] Francis Maude thinks that the Tory Party should be a greater cross section of society. I agree. It should try including Conservatives again. Although how someone like Maude, who signed away the United Kingdom's self governance at Maastricht and runs a "think tank" which advocates tax breaks for "homosexual marriages"and one of whose leading lights ran "wife-swap-ping parties" on a commercial basis, can claim to be a Conser-vative beggars belief. (Emphasis added).

"Minds Under Attack" - The Terrorism Of Political Correctness



We have pointed out several times that Political Correctness is a serious matter of mind control. Much of this pressure is applied through accepted everyday terms that are being deliberately interpreted as convey-ing more sinister implications. Examples are "blackboard" and "black list-ing" that are perceived to imply racial prejudices, or "vertically challenged" instead of "short" of stature. Exploited to limits of absurdity as is evident to any rational mind, this becomes a form of quasi-compulsory mental and social constraint. It is enforced through the processes of national and local government, the Health Service, Education, the "British" Broadcasting Corporation, the Police and even the Armed Forces. Political Correctness is imposed from the most senior levels down through administrative channels and exploits a combination of intimidation, addiction, coercion and sheep-like fear of not being seen to follow the "flock". It says little for the calibre of those in the most senior appointments, such as Chief Constables, Managers of Regional and District Health Authorities or leading Educationists. Through organisations like the Health and Safety Executive this is given added momentum by an army of bureaucrats and the submissive interpretation and exploitation of European Union legisla-tion. This is difficult to pin down to any specific source because responsi-bility lies with the collective operation of robotic "Jobsworths"; the chain of petty officials seen only to be "doing their job". It is also enforced by fear of expensive litigation coupled with legislative processes deliberately formulated to impose Politically Correct constraints over proper levels of independent judgement or authority down through any managerial chain, or on the part of responsible individuals, given the existence of consider-able evidence of industrial and other malpractice and injustice at the highest and most influential levels Even in the Armed Forces, Health and Safety regulations have required the use of ladders to enable tank crews to climb up and down from their vehicles instead of jumping. The Officer magazine for March-April, 2004 includes the following palpably absurd official diktats:

Moreover the warrior culture is constantly undermined by a political culture, which is risk-averse. The obsession with limiting risk through endless government legislation has particu-larly ridiculous consequences for the Armed Forces. Inspectors have, for instance, recommended that chlorine be used to disin-fect the water in an assault course tunnel for Royal Marines and handrails to prevent slip-ups on training slopes! Far from insulating troops against risk, such madness only makes them less prepared to face real dangers.

Paradoxically, the case of the Armed Forces does in fact reflect to a considerable degree the vagaries of the civilian sector in the context of the Government as the "employer". Clearly driven by the Treasury through Civil Service officials in the Ministry of Defence, every possible subter-fuge has been employed to avoid compensation for servicemen whose hearing has been damaged in battle or the normal execution of their duties, and to avoid recognition of the serious mental and physical damage caused by the Gulf War Syndrome and the use of Depleted Uranium ammunition.


We now consider another "symptom" of this contagious virus of Political Correctness; from social engineering and the encouragement of teenage promiscuity to the libertarianism of "Polyamory"; another socially destructive philosophy that has characteristically leached across the Atlantic from the United States. Propounded by one "Dr" Meg Barker of the South Bank University, in London, who admits to having four current lovers of both sexes, Polyamory involves the acceptance of stable multiple relationships. It is also clear evidence of "the long march through the institutions" that began with the "Frankfurt School" in the 1920s and how the sexual excursions of so-called intelligentsia can permeate down to more vulnerable elements of modern society. We can also read of an ear-lier phase in this process in a report of July, 1971, believed to come from The Times, headed "Promiscuity camps suggested". Dr Martin Cole, Lecturer in Genetics at Aston University was a notorious sex "therapist" of his time. He proposed the humanist, "ultra modern view" at the Modern Churchman's Conference at Roehampton that, as sexual activity appeared prevalent at camps operated for young people, contraceptives should be provided. This was the "chicken-and-egg" tactic of promotion and cure, the pretext of a perceived "great rift between adult and adolescent values" and at the risk of parental distress.

Homosexuality in the form of anal sex cannot possibly be ration-alised as physically normal, any more than square wheels on a vehicle. Homosexuality has nevertheless been progressively legalised over half a century to the extent that its "normality" has been enshrined in legislation. What ought to have been accepted in civilised terms as a very private relationship has been forced into the public domain by a well financed and organised minority pressure group. It is also fairly obvious that once "insiders" and politically motivated activists and sympathisers have infil-trated and become embedded in the legislative machinery the desired measures can be forced through. In their turn the Police have been suc-cessfully targeted, and even the Armed Forces through the European Court of Human Rights. Impaled on its own moral equivocation the Church has been effectively dead in the water. Such is the calibre of the Police "lead-ership" that the Sussex Police could even waste valuable public funds to sponsor a visit by two of its officers to "study gay policing methods in America" (The Daily Telegraph, 21st May, 2005).

In the United Kingdom we have already reported public criticism of the Bishop of Chester by the Chief Constable of Cheshire for perfectly legitimate comments on the homosexual condition. In Canada the influ-ence of Cultural Communism is well advanced such that a group called Christian Truth Activists has been penalised in court for distributing leaflets that included criticism of homosexual behaviour. In Canada, the Bishop of Calgary has been reported to the Human Rights Commission - here we go again! - for daring to criticise marriage between homosexuals. The first marriage between homosexuals in England is to be celebrated in Church in Brighton, Sussex, at about the time of writing. In another slant on Political Correctness the Daily Express of 13th November, 2004, reported that a 116-year-old tradition for meetings of Worcestershire County Council to by preceded by a prayer by a Church of England Chaplain was likely to be abandoned unless this was modified to recognise other faiths. This is being echoed by local authorities around the United Kingdom, who are gradually expunging "Christmas" from the lexicon of the Festive season. Only in the historic and still predominantly Christian United Kingdom would the people allow themselves to be betrayed in this way and marooned in their own country.


THE PATH AND PEDIGREE OF REVOLUTION

Tactics Of The Revolutionary Seed


One facet of the Twentieth Century has been the conflict driven by the contra-rotating, convoluted and confused forces of social adjustment, social justice, power, and privilege as perceived and exploited by the vari-ous factions and ideologies involved. The simplistic view has been that of an evolutionary battle between Capitalism and Communism. Yet at one level, that of those governments interwoven with capitalist interests, we had active collaboration between East and West(3)(4). At the same time the Soviet Union was operating a vast network of subversive organisations in the West(5). We have already pointed out that revolutionary forces serve the interests of Capitalism. An editorial in The Times of 28th May, 1968, headed "The Joys Of Disorder" gave expression to this situation in com-menting on the insurrections that broke out in France during 1968 when 8,000,000 rose up and took to the streets. This was the episode during which the notorious Communist "student" Danny Cohn-Bendit played a leading role. Here are some extracts:

For two weeks France has had a jolting more violent, more exhilarating, and more absorbing than anyone had believed possible. But exhilaration is short-lived and yesterday's settle-ment with the unions may offer the chance to most French people to acknowledge that fact. The mere brilliance of the revolutionary feu de joie bursting out in Paris has seemed momentarily to endow France with a unity of radical purpose. . . . By the end of the week when heads are counted, France may unquestionably find itself back at work. And the students, too, who are more excited but also more vague in their demands, may not last much longer. . . . Everyone has had different grounds of protest, some palpable, most much less ready to find in political change an answer to their needs (Emphasis added).

Does Revolution serve the objectives of Capitalism, and what role do those forces at play work deliberately to bring this about? Perhaps mindful of the subsequent progressive globalisation of financial and econ-omic Power to supra-national levels that now dominate the policies of individual National governments, we must draw our own conclusions from the final paragraph of the editorial of 1968:


But a much more immediate and certain outcome of the troubles because of the concessions made yesterday will be the shaking of the franc. Already rumours of M. Debré's resigna-tion are reported since he fears the concessions have been too much for France's financial stability. Even if the franc does sur-vive a buffeting at the very least France will have lost the power and perhaps the desire to attack the world monetary system. It would be an odd comment on the fires lit by "Danny the Red" that the organisation which may gain most practical advantages from his efforts should be the International Monetary Fund (Emphasis added).

Like the British miners' strike of 1985 the streets of Paris reflected the Revolutionary Armed Struggle - the employment of force - when such tactics were deemed necessary. In an article "Snobbery and Sociology" in The Daily Telegraph of 8th June, 1969, we see evidence of the Ideological Struggle and the swings of the academic "pendulum" in seeking a rational point of balance:

The academic bunfight at Cambridge over the proposed new faculty of social science with its own "tripos" examination, looks at first sight like another version of Oxford's recent struggle to drop one the two compulsory Anglo-Saxon papers in its English School. . . . Behind this lurk some rather snobbish doubts about whether sociology is really a respectable subject for study. It makes large claims for itself but many people feel that in dealing, as it must, with people and their subjective motives and behaviour it is imperfectly scientific. And behind that is a gut reaction about the assumed correlation between sociology students and the fomenters of revolution on the campus. The main centres of university unrest, the London School of Economics, Essex and Sussex, have a high proportion of sociology students, many of whom are conspicuously unruly. . . . If you pick up the current issues of two of the leading journals of sociology you'll find articles on "Navvies; Their Work Attitudes" and "Professionalisation in Britain: A Prelim-inary Measurement" and "Latin and the Elite tradition in educa-tion" and "Agrarian rationalism in Chile" and "Mobilisation as a macro-sociological concept" and "Social Class Differences in the Relevance of language to Socialisation" and "Inheritance, Property and Marriage in Africa and Eurasia" and "University Chancellors, Vice-Chancellors and College Principals: a Social Profile". There are clues here to what it's all about as well as jargon and hints of radicalism and social concern. (Emphasis added)

Germination Of The Revolutionary Seed



Can we determine these tends as symptomatic of a naturally evolv-ing society or are they evidence of the gradual penetration of our institu-tions with revolutionary objectives? It cannot be without significance that Rose L. Martin recorded that in its early years the London School of Economics was the beneficiary of a grant from the Rockefeller Founda-tion(6). It is worth reading this description, to which we have added the emphasis, of the role of Herbert Marcuse as one of the leading figures of the Frankfurt School(7):

Marcuse devoted himself to the practicalities of revolu-tion. He became the radical leader and strategist of the '68 movement in the lecture-halls of the universities, taking in such personalities as Angela Davis in the U.S.A. and Rudi Dutschke in Germany. From these beginnings, the critical theories of the Frankfurt School captivated that generation of students who set out on "the long march through the institutions" and who are today the decision-makers in the fields of politics, the media and society (Emphasis added).

If we talk the strategy of Revolution we are talking of one key area, that of Education. If we talk the tactics of Revolution, what we have been describing in the foregoing paragraphs are some of the tactics employed. Education in much of the Western World has now become sharply politicised along ideological lines. In the United Kingdom we have been subjected to anti-elitism, egalitarianism, a "no-fail" examination system, the suppression of competitive sport and the systematic degradation of authority and the pupil-teacher relationship. We also have a proliferation of illiteracy. Public money has been wasted on the proliferation of up-rated polytechnics as universities and "Mickey-Mouse" degrees. This can only be designed to implement the ideological principle of egalitarianism in that all are entitled to a university degree. Yet we hear repeated protests that basic British industries lack suitably qualified employees. This in turn can only be a consequence of political motivation that has resulted in inept forecasting and planning with apparent disregard for the consequences of the mis-match between the requirement and educational provision. In turn again, this is used to justify immigration with the knock-on effect of unnecessary racial and cultural admixture and therefore dilution. From 1968 one may justifiably suggest that this had all been well-planned! There can be no one-size-fits-all, no-one-below-the-average condition except in the philosophical veneer of those determined on the destruction of the Existing Order. Who are they? Marcuse knew only too well who they were and where they were going. From such sources we now have a proliferation of bureaucratic absurdities destined to control even the minds of the youngest children. The traditional game of conkers has been banned because of the physical risks, the traditional three-legged race is considered too competitive and the traditional Punch-and-Judy show is considered to promote violence.


On 23rd November, 1970, a leading newspaper (unattributed but we believe The Daily Telegraph) reported on addresses given by the late Enoch Powell to various organisations such as the Young Conservatives. Powell was a brilliant intellectual and deep thinker who was very well aware of what made the world "tick". Under the heading "Minds under attack", here are the main points from the report:

Returning to his "enemy within" theme at the weekend Mr Enoch Powell said: "The citadel which is under attack is our own minds, and from that citadel the attack must be repelled. Only then can it be fought with the weapons of truth telling in the face of the world, even though all beside were prepared to tell falsehood." . . . . [A] movement in opinion had taken place in the five months since his Birmingham speech, and Mr Heath had echoed his words at the United Nations. . . . [H]e [Powell] drew the attention of the electors to the fact that Britain was "under attack by forces from within." At the United Nations on 23rd October, the Prime Minister said: "We must recognise the new threat to the peace of the nations, indeed to the fabric of society . . . It may be that in the 1970s civil war will be the main danger we will face."

THOSE WHO NOW RULE OVER US

The Myth, The Reality - And The Conspiracy, Believe It Or Not

The revolutionary forces we have been discussing and the path along which we, as a society, are gradually being moulded, driven, cajoled, coerced, encouraged and legislated involve a hugely complex and convo-luted scenario. To make sense of what this means or implies for whom, we are essentially back to peeling away successive layers of the conceptual "onion", to which we have frequently referred in the past. We have to know where the impetus and the Power ultimately lie. One thing is certain in our own country and across the Atlantic. Democracy in the sense of individuals collectively determining their own destiny, or enjoying the ability to dwell as an egalitarian and tolerant society, can exist only in theory or in the smallest commune. Even then, some greater intellect or personality within such a group is likely to prevail. The progressive consolidation of Power has moved any other than cosmetic participation out of reach of the mass of ordinary people. In the greater social, political and material pyramid all the lesser contributory pyramids will instinctively shake down and interact in one hierarchical form or another. Of one thing we may be sure; there will be those at the top and those lower down the scale. This is the natural and inescapable order we may see reflected in the animal kingdom. The real question lies is how justly and effectively this gigantic global structure will function or be manipulated right down to the individual; given that all are in principle supposedly born equal.

In 2001, Dr Noreena Hertz, Associate Director of the Centre of International Business Management at the Judge Institute of Cambridge University, wrote The Silent Takeover - Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy(8). The title of her book, from which we reproduce this small extract, is self-explanatory:

Each new merger gives corporations even more power. All the goods we buy or use - our petrol, the drugs our G.Ps. prescribe, essentials like water, transport, health and education, even the new school computers and crops growing in the fields around our communities - are increasingly controlled by corp-orations which may at their whim choose to nurture, support or strangle us. This is the world of the Silent Takeover, the world at the dawn of the new millennium. Governments' hands are tied and we are increasingly dependent on corporations.

In her book Dr Hertz identifies the power of the American Mon-santo agrochemical corporation, with special reference to pressure from the United States to overturn a ban on genetically modified cattle growth hormone in Europe. Jose MacDonald, B.Sc., founder of Farming and Live-stock Concern, has spoken of a permanent presence maintained by Mon-santo in Brussels. The then European Union Agriculture Commissioner, Franz Fischler, had opposed the introduction of genetically modified material in Europe. Mrs MacDonald was present at an European Union conference on biotechnology, staged and managed by Monsanto, at which Fischler abruptly reversed his original decision. Why then, was the Guar-dian newspaper moved to publish a derisive and destructive review of The Silent Takeover, unworthy of even the gutter press, on 31st May, 2001, by one Howard Davies? Art Helgart of Michigan, in the United States, wrote in response to The Guardian Weekly, of 21st - 27th June, 2001. Under the heading "Face up to global reality", he put the matter into perspective:

In his review of The Silent Takeover, Howard Davies mocks Noreena Hertz's observation of the impotence of contem- porary democracy ("a breathless piece of globalony", 31st May). He should look no further than the United States, where both political parties are funded by the corporate rich, and the media are owned by them. Ninety per cent of the population is kept politically illiterate, and the government takes orders from the corporations. Or look at Britain, where the dominant party seems to have nothing in common with labour other than its name.


So who is Howard Davies? Now "Sir" Howard Davies, the author of this scurrilous review, is on record as Chairman of the Financial Services Authority, a Director of the Bank of England, Director General of the Confederation of British Industry and as an adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer during the Government of Margaret Thatcher. Careful research will reveal much of the Power network of which Davies is a part. Interlocking directorships link banks, major corporations, the media, the universities, public services, regulatory and advisory bodies, government commissions, trusts, foundations and such organisations as the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Aspen Institute. This network extends right into the heart of governments on both sides of the Atlantic and the European Commission. This closely-knit world of "movers and shakers" exists within and above the level of government, beyond the reach of electorates. When he quoted the German Günter Grass, that "Parliament is degenerating into a subsidiary of the stock market" in his article "Demo-cracy in a flawed world" in The Guardian Weekly of 20th - 26th May, 2005, Peter Preston hit the nail on the head. In Online Journal of 10th January, 2004, Michael Hasty, quotes William Blum, a former insider:.

In his book, Rogue State - A Guide to the World's Only Superpower(9), William Blum warns of how the media will make anything that smacks of "conspiracy theory" an immediate "ob-ject of ridicule". This prevents the media from ever having to investigate the many strange interconnections among the ruling class - for example, the relationship between the boards of directors of media giants, and the energy, banking and defence industries. These unmentionable topics are usually treated with what Blum calls "the media's most effective tool - silence". But in case somebody's asking questions, all you have to do is say, "conspiracy theory", and any allegation instantly becomes too frivolous to merit serious attention. On the other hand, since my paranoid shift, whenever I hear the words "conspiracy theory" (which seems more often, lately) it usually means that someone is getting too close to the truth.

Ruling Elites - The Power Brokers In Denial


Much of the argument about Power in the United Kingdom has centred around that of social class to the point of obsession. This extends from the Monarchy down through the aristocracy to landowners, the wealthy upper strata of the middle classes, the aspirational lower middle classes to ordinary people who push the pen, wield the spanner and clean the streets. What very few hoist in, in an often artificially generated class "war", is that one Ruling Elite simply replaces and merges with another. We have seen this in the duplicitous and manipulative ascent to Power of The "New" Labour Party since 1997; in nepotism and corruption worthy of the Nomenklatura in the former Soviet Union. The Power structure behind society today continues to evolve and still maintain its position as Kevin Cahill has shown in Who Owns Britain(10). The accepted image of Left-Right, Worker-Capitalist had considerable currency with the injustice and poverty of the Industrial Revolution. This led to Marxism, Socialism and Syndicalism, but still left the question of who would wield the actual Power. As late as the 1930s Fabian Socialists truly believed in the images painted for them during their visit to the Soviet Union of Josef Stalin(11). It took Malcolm Muggeridge, who had been a resident correspondent in Moscow, to expose these fallacies and the role played by liberal idealism(12).

There is little doubt that the Royal Houses discreetly stick together in the survival business. There is equally little doubt that the public school network and close links of descent and marriage by their very nature give the upper classes both coherence and continuity that has its roots in our ancient culture. Thus the Dukes of Richmond and Gordon are identified with Gordon-Lennox, and the Earls of Plymouth extend through the Windsor-Chives. The old aristocracy of the land gave way to the new with the age of colonisation and foundation of the Bank of England, and the modern money system - Bankerism - with the Tonnage Act of 1694. Largely from this period the public school system "laundered" the scions of the emergent rich of banking and industry into the network. Ivan Reid published what was substantially an analytical examination of the class system with numerous charts and tables giving relative mortality rates, categories of employment, home ownership and other statistics(13). In The Rise and Fall of Class in Britain David Cannadine offered a more readable analysis(14). In the Preface he quoted one Stein Rengen whom he considered had summed up the situation accurately:

What is peculiar about Britain is not the reality of the class system and its continuing existence, but class psychology; the preoccupation with class, the belief in class, and the symbols of class in manners, dress and language. . . . Britain is a thoroughly modern society, with thoroughly archaic institutions, conventions and beliefs.

Class, Calibre Or Quality?


Cannadine devotes two pages to the intense dislike of Margaret Thatcher for the Aristocracy in her drive for a materialist Meritocracy. It personified the unrequited envy of a prosperous urban middle class; those who might mix with "them", but perceived themselves as not "of them". Here we perhaps have a more pertinent and malignant factor behind any so-called class "war", tantamount to an internecine conflict amongst the Ruling Elite, and much the same as the struggle for Power currently being waged by Prime Minister Blair and his aficionados today? We have no reason to apologise for 2,000 years of culture. We can boil much of this argument to a succinct what is "done" and what is "not done"; something that is exclusive to no one. It also questions the perpetual sniping beloved of the often envious, resentful and self-consciously inadequate class war-rior with whom no one particularly wishes to pick a fight! One may use cutlery in several ways, for example, but most draw the line at eating peas off a knife. One does not break wind in public, and a wholly unnecessary fuss is generated about dialect in the guise of "accent". However Tony Blair may debase the image of his office by posturing for his public with banjo and jeans, when the three main party leaders appeared together recently in public properly suited, all had fastened their 3-button jacket by the centre button according to convention. In the Left-leaning Observer of 31st March, 2002, Peter Oborne wrote:

Tony Blair and his Ministers abase themselves before the Murdoch press and the cult of football. Ambitious Cabinet Ministers routinely seek favour with the public service unions or the tabloids by expounding a cretinous egalitarianism. Hence Education Secretary Estelle Morris's recent attack on "snobs" who speak up for high examination standards. Gordon Brown, one of the few members of the Cabinet with any claim to be an intellectual, has a sideline in attacking Oxbridge "elitism"


In Britain we have come dangerously close to precipitating the meritocratic free-for-all, much of it a legacy of Margaret Thatcher; visible in the loud vulgarity of contemporary entertainers, money pouring into the celebrity culture, and the "Essex man". Nowhere is this more exemplified than by Jeremy Clarkson, the B.B.C. motoring presenter. Referred to as "Turbomouth", Clarkson leads a band of equally vociferous motoring commentators who self-indulgently drive exotic cars to ridiculous extremes unthinkable on any public road, bawling their commentary as they go. The Rover Car Company enjoyed a brief reincarnation after purchase from B.M.W., but has been blighted by the alleged financial excursions of the new directorship. As the sole surviving major British-owned manufacturer only a handful, about 10 per cent, of the Government's ministerial fleet appeared to be Rover, despite the existence of some excellent and well-reviewed models. Rover cars were not adopted by Police, according to one report due to Politically Correct considerations of "discrimination". Such disloyalty to the National ideal is unlike anything that would have been tolerated in France, for example. Worse, Rover cars were unnecessarily and boorishly savaged by Clarkson. Perhaps this has been symbolic of the Pol-itically Correct, International Socialist ethos of the Nation today. This letter, "Press to blame for Rover's fall", to the Professional Engineer of 11th May, 2005, confirms our own assessment:

In your Commentary, referring to the M.G. Rover deb-acle, you say "we concentrate too much on bad news and not enough on good". True, but it is hardly arguable that you have affected the outcome. The same cannot be said of the motoring press, which has conducted a veritable hatchet job on Rover, and should have been sued for their shirts by Rover. Until this month, when Rover has conveniently disappeared from the "new car prices" pages, every single model has been slated brutally every month. Is that how they think they should treat the only volume British manufacturer? It would be naive to imagine that this bad publicity did not affect sales - of course it did. Here is an example from a last "opinion" before the closure, on the Model 25: "It's not impossible to ignore all this - in which case you are left with a dated supermini with friendly road manners that are mildly (but only mildly) endearing . . . at £2,000 less, it might be worth a punt." I wonder why he forgot to mention that Rover sold 760,000 units of that model. Meanwhile, expensive imported vehicles with far more faults got film-star treatment. Let's have the blame for this debacle placed where it belongs, on the motoring press.

The late Anthony Sampson, author of the long-running Anatomy of Britain series was a liberal thinker with no evident affection for the privi-leged classes, wrote in The Independent of 11th September, 2004, "We've abandoned the tradition of a ruling class. But is this to Britain's benefit?".. He concluded with this paragraph:

British politicians can be thankful to have got rid of the arrogance and self-interest of their old ruling class. But they need to be reminded of the advantages of the best of it - the tradition of public service and long-term thinking. They need to escape from the short-term pressures of opportunism and dependence that are so evident. And as they face America's new ruling class, with all its cynical bargains with corporations and manipulation of the voters, they need to remember the British still have their own inherited values and traditions of political integrity.



CLOSING REFLECTIONS ON PART 1

So far, we have looked at some of the forces shaping and re-shaping our society. We have looked at the motivation and its sources. Yet another move to dismantle and eliminate our historic traditions, customs and values has now been brought to our notice. On 23rd May, 2005, the Daily Mail published a report with the headline: "'President' Blair urged to scrap Queen's speech for one of his own". The Mail reported a need for "an American-style presidential address by the Prime Minister". This clearly reflected Toady Blair's obsequious obsession with his ruthlessly powerful and distinctly un-democratic friend George W. Bush. The report that advocated this and other "modernisation" was spearheaded by the relatively newly ennobled "New" Labour show business Peer, Lord Put-tnam, and was attributed with the insulting comment that "The age-old ritual is spoiled by the spectacle of an ageing monarch 'mumbling' into some parchment". The Puttnam caucus was apparently "commissioned" by the Hansard Society "think tank" - whatever that is - and comprised "senior politicians representing all three main parties, alongside journalists and others". The Mail did not elaborate, but one wonders what on earth hacks from the Media were doing to speak for the British people? And who precisely were the "others" who presumed to do so? This group was arguably bent on the unnecessary destruction of that which makes our ancient history unique and the envy of others. One even more sinister and dangerous recommendation was that allegiance should be sworn to the organs of Government instead of to the Monarch, wherein lies the ultimate protection of our freedoms against our political masters. The path of what we have been discussing in the foregoing pages , and the Daily Mail report, are tantamount to the Marxist objectives for destruction of the Existing Order. The following extracts sum up the process admirably:

Diet, injections and injunctions will combine from a very early age to produce the sort of characteristics and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so. . . . Gradually, or by selective breeding, the congenital differ-nces between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs against the masters would become as unthinkable as an organised insurrec-ion of sheep against the practice of eating mutton. (Bertrand Russell(15))


The havoc wrought in the character of this once proud people [of the United Kingdom] in the last three generations has now become apparent in every department of their lives. Self-respect, self-help, and independence are dead. Over-indulgence of every kind, if possible at other people's expense, is the order of the day, and begins in infancy. The whole population aims chiefly at obtaining something for nothing. Vulgar ostentation is everywhere rife; for money easily come by is readily squandered. Because discipline is now regarded as not quite "English" and is thought to reek of "Fascism", hooliganism and insensate aggressiveness are the favourite expressions of freedom in the youth of the nation. . . . It is as if the original fibre of the nation's character sedulously built up by the more civilised conditions of the past, has rotted and perished. (Anthony M. Ludovici(16))

In the second part of this two-part edition of On Target, we propose to look at the sterile political battle that culminated this year in the General Election of 5th May. We shall pay particular attention to the fabrication of the war against Iraq and the character of the Prime Minister and his associates. We shall also examine the collapsing economic scenario and the considerations that are deliberately determining the nature of the soci-ety vulnerable to this scenario.

(To be continued)


REFERENCES

Note:. Prices are shown where available from Bloomfield Books, and represent only a selection relevant to the theme of this edition of On Target. A wide range of reading may be found in the Stock Price List (S.P.L.), which may be obtained post free on request from the address on the last page. Books temporarily out of stock are annotated *. Out of print, or older works, may be obtained through the Book Search Service, or the Second-Hand Book Service, both of which are operated by Mr. T.G. Turner, for which details are available as for the S.P.L.

(1) Spengler, Oswald. The Decline of the West. Translated by Charles Francis Atkinson. Alfred A. Knopf, 1926.
(2) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos 5 & 6 and 8 & 9, 4th & 18th September and 16th & 30th October, 2004. Control And Nature Of The Coming World Order.
(3) Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. Arlington House Publishers, 1974. P/B reprint; £13.00.
(4) Sutton, Antony C. National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union. Arlngton House Publishers, 1973. P/B reprint; £14.75.
(5) Rose, Sir Clive. The Soviet Propaganda Network - A Directory Of Organisa-tions Serving Soviet Foreign Policy. Pinter Publishers, London in association with John Spiers. St Martin's Press, New York. 1988.
(6) Martin, Rose L. Fabian Freeway - High Road To Socialism In The U.S.A. 1884-1966. Western Islands, 1966.

(7) Current Concerns is regularly published in Switzerland as a tabloid newspaper in English. It offers an interesting range of reports and analyses by European and other experts. Enquiries should be addressed to Current Concerns, P.O. Box 223, CH-8044, Zurich. Tel: +41-1-350 65 50; Fax: +41-350 65 51.
(8) Hertz, Noreena. The Silent Takeover - Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy. William Heinemann, 2001.
(9) Blum, William. Rogue State - A Guide to the World's Only Superpower. Zed Books, London; Spearhead, South Africa. First published, 2000, revised 2002.
(10) Cahill, Kevin. Who Owns Britain. Canongate Books, 2001.
(11) Webb, Sidney and Beatrice. Soviet Communism: A New Civilisation. Longmans Green & Company. First published 1935. Hardback reprint in one volume, 1947.
(12) Muggeridge, Malcolm. The Great Liberal Death Wish. The Australian League of Rights, 1979.
(13) Reid, Ivan. Class in Britain. Polity Press, 1998.
(14) Cannadine, David. The Rise and Fall of Class in Britain. Columbia University Press, 1999.
(15) Russell, Bertrand. The Impact of Science Upon Society. Simon & Schuster, 1953.
(16) Ludovici, Anthony M. The Specious Origins Of Liberalism - The Genesis Of A Delusion. Britons Publishing Company, 1967.

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159