POLITICAL CORRECTNESS (P.C.)
WEAPON OF MASS MENTAL AND SOCIAL DESTRUCTION

We open our examination of the significance of, and the threat to society from Political Correctness (P.C.), with an extract from "Political Correctness and the Ideological Struggle", by Dr Frank Ellis(2):

"For the Chinese communist", notes [Harry] Wu, "the aim is not to destroy him (the prisoner) a hostile ele-ment physically through violence, but to destroy him mentally and ideologically, while threatening him with violence" Certain forms of physical abuse are used in conjunction with thought reform, as in the degrading ritual of bai loa men ("paying respects to the cell god"), which involves a new prisoner's being made to suck up excrement from a bucket through straws and then say that the excrement tasted delicious.

So you thought that Political Correctness was something of a joke, perhaps a typically American oddball fad that originated there and has leached its way across the Atlantic. Something slightly ludicrous to be exploited by liberal ideologues, a robotic and bureaucratic Civil Service and various teaching and other training establishments? Was Political Correctness simply something that caught the imagination and found its way innocently into popular usage? Or was it something far more sinister; a virus; a philosophy deliberately introduced, one that, exactly as intended, has seeped down through local government and other elements of society in which subtle and apparently determined attempts are being made to infuse or impose change; not simple evolutionary changes, or change for change's sake, but in which longstanding, perfectly understandable and adequate conventions such a "Chairman" have to be challenged and replaced by "Chair". Or is it a combination of both? Does it have an objective or a purpose? Has one been a catalyst for the other? Were you, the reader, ever consulted? Do you know where this movement began, and why? Can you put a name or an organisation as the source or the authority for these trends?

The lady "Chairman" of a local Art Society, a term happily accep-ted by members of all ages and both sexes, and in the written Constitution of that Society, wrote to her local newspaper but when her letter was published this had been arbitrarily changed in the editorial department to "Chair" without any prior consultation. A retired headmistress, a formid-able lady, was asked about the liberal use of Christian names across the age and professional spectrum, as between teaching staff and pupils in certain schools, in general social exchanges or in business, she replied firmly that this was the way things were done today. Asked if she had ever been consulted about the imposition of these informalities, especially as they affected her, she could only reply that, come to think of it, no, she had not. Many conventions are anomalous - what about the sexist term "Manhole Cover"? Try cracking that one. The Nation, let alone the world as a whole, is in a parlous state. In the United Kingdom Public Services - Health Care, Education, Transport, and Law and Order have been disrupted by conflicting philosophies or are simply collapsing. Yet individual time and effort, and precious public funds can be devoted to preoccupation with officially applying and imposing the mores of Political Correctness; for example, officially redefining "Short" as "Vertically Challenged" and so on. On 26th November, 2002, the Daily Mail a newspaper detested by the Liberal-Libertarian lobby, reported that the Equalities Minister at the Department of Trade and Industry, Barbara Roche, had ruled that the term "homosexual" was to be redefined officially as "orientation towards people of the same sex" in response to pressure from the "Gay" community and trades unions. Such is the "orientation" of our mental energies, priorities and critically scarce public funds.

What Is The Extent, Nature And Range Of Political Correctness?

Here we may go right back to the words of Barbara Roche and the work of Dr Ellis(3). Now read the far deeper implications and purpose in the use of language and definitions:

(T)he intention is to use language as a weapon. In this scenario language is not primarily used to communicate ideas but rather to signal the speaker's willingness to submit to the politically correct register (gay, for example, in place of homo-sexual or gender in place of sex). Language is power not for the masses but for the [Communist] party intellectuals who are to instruct us on correct usage. Contemporary political correctness pursues the same policy by dominating public discourse and cre-ating a climate of fear such that "incorrect" opinion is declared illegitimate, extreme or racist and so on.

At first sight it is all too easy to dismiss Political Correctness, to ignore it, submit to it or to work round it. Today Western society is strongly self-orientated, materialist and deliberately conditioned by the Mass Communications Media. We have frequently referred to this as the great soft underbelly of our society. Younger generations, often maligned, but sharply observant and perceptive, are not allowed insights into serious questions such as those associated with Political Correctness through the Education System or the Media. Political Correctness will not attract much serious conversation or concern in the bar at the local golf club, across the dinner table, in the local pub, at the workplace, in the office or in the clubland of Pall Mall and St James. When one is committed to research, analysis and commentary on national and international affairs, and on the state of the Nation, its declining culture, traditions and morality, it rapidly becomes apparent that few people, at any level of society, employment, occupation or profession have any interest or knowledge beyond the conditioned horizons of their chosen Media outlet. When Cultural Communism came openly to be discussed in the 1990s, but only by the so-called "Populist" press, were we able to identify the dimensions of a systematic attack on the stability of society in the West(4). This exposure was owed, at least in part, to the collapse of the Soviet Communist system - not the collapse of the Marxist World Revolution as most have been persuaded to accept - and the subsequent exposure of the true nature of Communism in its relationship to the objectives of the Ruling Elite, the Global Power Brokers, in the West. It is also significant that "Populism" is a term that also seems to have originated in the United States. It is deliberately associated subliminally with "Hard" or "Extreme" Right Wing politics in order to discredit those who threaten to expose the threat from International Socialism as the natural progression of the World Revolution towards the ultimate globalisation of Power.

The work of Dr Ellis in "Political Correctness and the Ideological Struggle" came to our notice only in the past twelve months. From a long list of Key Words in his introduction we read "Chinese Communist Party", "Class Enemy", "Cultural Revolution", "Feminism", "Lenin", "Marcuse" (a leading exponent of Cultural Communism and prominent in the student insurrections of the 1960s), "Multiculturalism", "New Left" and "Thought Reform", we recognised the extent and deadly seriousness of Political Correctness. The continuity of this revolutionary theme became clear. It was not just another American fad. It had a specific purpose and was operating like a deadly virus in society. In the concluding paragraph of his Paper(5), Dr Ellis had written:

To conclude I offer an allegory. It is pessimistic and belongs to the genre of low-budget horror films. Imagine a giant arachnid, defeated and mortally wounded, which in its death throes, manages to ejaculate a stream of spores. The victor, savouring his hard won triumph, fails to see that the spores have landed on his body. If not decontaminated they will begin the process of his metamorphosis into the very monster he has just vanquished.

Here, we would only reiterate that Communism collapsed only in the form of the Soviet System; the World Revolution precipitated by Karl Marx was alive and well, up and running elsewhere in the form of International Socialism. We must remember, too, that the second "S" in U.S.S.R. stood for Socialist. However, the pressures of research, analysis and the rest, and the hard labour of generating any general interest in the state of the Nation or global affairs generally had led us to file a wide range of topics in folders labelled "Why Bother"! A bluntly spoken Yorkshire-man had once described the general apathy in public life as akin to stirring cold porridge - when one stops pushing it, it stops moving! However, induced by the writing of Dr Ellis, we also began to file loose cuttings in another folder, labelled specifically "Political Correctness". When this material became too voluminous to contain, we devoted several days to collating and photocopying it. To date we have accumulated three full four-ring binders. Under what are still provisional sub-categories we used the following headings: "Politically Correct Absurdities and the Bureaucracy", "Power, the Ruling Elite and Society Today", "Politics and Europe", "Money Power", "Asylum, Immigration and Race", "Education, Children and Rights", "Sex, Society and Morality", "Liberalism, Perver-sion and Drugs", "Law, Order and the Police" and "Media, Conditioning, Sex and Violence". These subjects inevitably tend to run one into the other and there has to be some elasticity in setting down these categories. The question may well be asked, "What on earth has this to do with Political Correctness, with terms like "Chair" and "Vertically Challenged", or the banning of traditional childrens' games and competitive sport"?

THE FORCES SHAPING OUR MINDS

Cause, Effect, And General Unease

In an analysis of Political Correctness we must be careful to discriminate. "Discriminate" alone is an example of how distortion may be sewn in the mind. To discriminate is to distinguish between differing entities. Today this term has been expanded and distorted from its original meaning - hi-jacked - to include prejudice as in the case of race, immigrant culture, sexual orientation and so on. Modified, authenticated in modern dictionaries, we may see the smoke and mirrors of a long-laid trail to condition how we think and react. This is where we have to identify root causes rather than only the effects. It is also a case of recognising the complex and invariably obscure trail from the "virus" of Political Correctness; the "spores" suggested by Dr Ellis(6), and the need to relate effects to causes. We must also be careful not to confuse induced and natural changes in patterns due, for instance, to expanding technology or living habits as in the random and somewhat quirky but useful example of the bowler hat. A common sight on the streets of London only three decades ago, the bowler hat has almost disappeared. But this is more simply attributed to cost, and contemporary weather and travel patterns.

Two hundred years and more ago newspapers were so priced as to exclude the mass of the people from news and events. In the last half-century there has been a massive explosion in the means of popular communication. To associate the demise of the bowler hat with Political Correctness would verge on the paranoid. Equally, we must avoid the trap of accepting reports and exposures in the modern Mass Communications Media necessarily at face value or as representative of a particular situation when these may easily have been deliberately highlighted and taken out of the general context to establish a particular political or philosophical position. Ellis(7) identifies the links between Political Correctness and Marxist-Leninist doctrine. In the meticulously detailed Soviet Politico-Military Doctrine that evolved from this we had Diversion ("Diversiya") which relates directly to the Ideological Struggle, for the mind. Agitation and Propaganda were elements of Diversion. The connection between formal Soviet Communist tactics and political-commercial tactics in the West must be obvious.

Nationhood And Sovereignty Are Fundamental

That we must be conditioned to think only along certain lines must logically have some ultimate objective in the service of as yet unidentified Forces, Interests or Powers if we are not to accept Political Correctness as an end in itself. This means a challenge to "us", as a Nation; a natural association of culture, tradition and race that evolves over centuries. We must account for the continuing evolution and any justification for this in a globalising world in which certain forces would make National boundaries philosophically and technically irrelevant. This is immediately apparent in the arguments against political integration in an European Federal "State" in which ultimate economic control would be vested in an unelected cabal of private bankers controlling a single currency. Major C.H. Douglas, M.I.Mech.E., was active promulgating Social Credit in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. This was a widely promoted and discussed chall-enge during this period to the debt-usury system of "money" creation by the private banks. Here is a significant comment by Douglas when answer-ing questions after he addressed a gathering in Liverpool in 1936:

What is important is that we should become conscious of our sovereignty - that we should associate consciously, understanding the purpose of our association, and refusing to accept results which are alien to the purpose of our association. We must learn to control our actions consciously, and not at the behest of some external control of which we are not conscious" (Emphasis added).

Professor Arnold Toynbee was Director of Studies at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (R.I.I.A.), 1925, Director Foreign Research and Press Service, R.I.I.A., 1939-43 and Director Research Department, Foreign Office, 1943-46. In June 1931 Toynbee addressed a conference in Copenhagen. The title of Toynbee's Paper was "The Trend Of International Affairs Since The War". These Conferences were initiated by the League of Nations Institute for Intellectual Cooperation. The National Coordinating Committee in Great Britain was domiciled at the R.I.I.A. and included representatives from the Institute, the London School of Economics and Political Science (L.S.E.), the Woodrow Wilson Chair of International Politics at Aberystwyth and the Montagu Burton Chair of International Relations at Oxford. Here is a key extract from his address(8):

* In the spirit of determination which happily animates us, we shall have no inclination to under-estimate the strength of the political force which we are striving to overcome. What is this force? If we are frank with ourselves, we shall admit that we are engaged on a deliberate and sustained and concentrated effort to impose limitations upon the sovereignty and independence of fifty or sixty local sovereign independent States which at present partition the habitable surface of the earth and divide the political allegiance of mankind. The surest sign, to my mind, that this fetish of local national sovereignty is our intended victim is the emphasis with which our statesmen and our publicists protest with one accord, and over and over again, at every step forward which we take, that, whatever changes we may make in the international situation, the sacred principle of local sovereignty will be maintained inviolable. This I repeat, is a sure sign that, at each of those steps forward, the principle of local sovereignty is really being encroached upon and its sphere of action reduced and its power for evil restricted. It is just because we are really attacking the principle of local sovereignty that we keep protesting our loyalty to it so loudly. The harder we press our attack upon the idol, the more pains we take to keep its priests and devotees in a fool's paradise - lapped in a false sense of security which will inhibit them from taking up arms in their idol's defence.

The Long Trail From Cause To Effect

We are constrained to consider the effects of Political Correctness mainly within the parameters of the Nation State; here, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. If Political Correctness is a valid component of the threat to our continuing identity, culture and traditions, we must relate this to three key factors. First is the condition or state of the United Kingdom which is being fashioned by forces beyond the simple "two-dimensional" concept of conventional party-political and conventional economic influences. Second is to recognise the need to destabilise society; to undermine subliminally, tactically and through legislation, the will and potential of the people to recognise the true threat behind and beyond these conventionally accepted images and resist it. This means in turn the elimination of personal initiative, thought, respon-sibility, freedom of expression and strong racial and cultural identity. All these factors may be identified by research and analysis, through accumulated information and observation. Thirdly, if Political Correctness is not to be regarded as an end in itself, what are the ultimate aims and what are the Forces in whose interest Political Correctness functions? The Mass Communications Media are to a large extent controlled. The same elements of the Ruling Elite connect across the boards of an increasingly centralised - and internationalised - Media, Multinational Corporations, and in Government circles as advisers, as lobbies of vested interests, or even in ministerial appointments. Local newspapers on the other hand are less inhibited. Many remain in private ownership. The degree of public concern at the state of the Country may be gauged from trends in the correspondence columns. We base this on our own regional press, but this must broadly reflect popular opinion across the Country. We intend to publish further selections from this correspondence in future editions of On Target as we continue to explore Political Correctness. The letter repro-duced here was published in the Shropshire Star of 16th July, 2003, with the heading "Why has our society faltered?" under the pen of the Reverend J. Williams writing from as far away as Surrey:

* As a vicar and writer in the Church of England I am being inundated with letters from people from all over the United Kingdom who are despairing at the state this country is in. My postbag reveals that there is an unofficial debate going on with people asking, what has gone wrong with Britain? I would be most grateful if I could use your letters page to further discussion and debate in your area.

Society has now got so bad it appears that the very essence of what being British stood for - justice, decency and common sense - is in meltdown. People are saying the country has gone mad with crime and teenage pregnancies soaring, family values collapsing, and teachers being reprimanded for disciplining pupils, road rage, courts failing adequately to punish offenders and so on. Politicians often give the problems of poverty, unemployment and bad housing as being reasons for this rise in crime, however the United Kingdom has always had these problems to a greater or lesser degree so clearly something else has gone wrong.

In the past there was a marked fall in crime as church attendance rose. This was noted by commentators of the day. One such historian A.J. Pike wrote: "There has never been a time in which life and property have been so secure". It seems that it wasn't people's fear of arrest that kept them from breaking the law but their inner morality. Church attendance had promoted conscience, self-control and the belief that they were accountable to God. The lesson from history is surely that these values can only be ignored at a terrible cost. Today's Britain is paying that price.

The strategy of which we believe Political Correctness to be a key part has a much longer record and goes far beyond the actions of the present "New Labour" British Government of boy Prime Minister Tony Blair. What we do believe is that New Labour, far from embodying or perpetuating traditional Labour values, is imposing the values and ideals of International, Fabian Socialism. Under the symbol of the tortoise; gradual change as opposed to the revolutionary change of Soviet Communism, the same Socialist objectives of the World Revolution are being achieved. An important work to which we have often referred is Rose L. Martin's Fabian Freeway - High Road To Socialism In The U.S.A.(9). Here we should take note of the story of the frog; placed in boiling water it will immediately jump out again; placed in cold water with a gradually, imperceptibly rising temperature, the frog is cooked unaware of its planned fate. Protest, dissatisfaction and complaint there will always be. The key is to perceive the trends rather than the absolute. Political Correctness per se, and its role in national and global affairs has to be a matter of careful study. On the other hand, the public at large will cast about in its ignorance like an animal in pain, some with sharp perceptions, but most with little understanding beyond their own circumstances of despair and frustration supported by "gut feelings". The next two letters, both from the Shropshire Star, display these sentiments and concerns well. The first letter was published on 5th December, 2002, with the heading "Blair and his team of vandals". The second letter appeared on 21st December, 2002, with the title "Changing world, but is it all for the good":

* The seemingly inexorable vandalism of this Government continues unabated as it seeks to eradicate not only our culture, society and sovereignty but now our heritage and eventually our religious buildings. It is obsessed with issues of political correctness, anti-xenophobia and sexual orientation. But the control-freak culture of this administration doesn't care a fig about indigenous feelings and beliefs. Blair can wear his heart on his sleeve when on public display, fawning over George W. Bush or attending State occasions, but when it comes to so-called modernising, everything gets trampled under his feet. The latest attack is on school nativity plays and fundraising concerts which are often the only way to maintain historic buildings. Through the introduction of entertainment licences Blair is determined to cut the lifeline of funding. It's cool to see Christmas subjugated by the Winter-tide and festivals of Light. The whingers are determined to suppress our celebration of Guy Fawkes or New Year because a few crackles upset the family pet. Blair will soon have a whistle-blower at the top of every street ready to squeal on Santa Claus for breaking and entering.

* I am in my 80s and, like the rest of my generation, gave my country six years in the second World War, in the Army. "For what?" we say. Well there has been a lot of invention and progress, like television, which shows how to commit crime and tells us on the news all the bad things that have happened. There are, of course, washing machines, cars (two per household), holidays abroad, computers and many, many other things - and to pay for it all mothers have to go out to work. The do-gooders have ruined the country, with no discipline in schools, the police are powerless in many situations all because the thugs have human rights. The victims don't, of course. In my day you weren't afraid to go out after dark, you could leave your door open all night, your bike in the garden and it would still be there in the morning. The law is an ass. Life should mean life or better still, bring back hanging. For thugs bring back the birch. And all offenders, whatever their age, should be named. Then we come to the M.Ps. and councillors. They reward themselves with huge allowances and laptop computers and don't have to account for their claims. Town halls have trebled their staff and built huge empires.

The Daily Mail is, in our opinion, the only mainstream newspaper that consistently campaigns against the situation reflected in the foregoing letters. It is therefore ritually identified with the political "Right", what--ever that is meant to mean, and with the interests of the "Middle Classes", whatever they may be deemed to be in the real world. Towards the end of 2001 we attended a local protest meeting against the United States-driven invasion of Afghanistan. The meeting was addressed by Paul Marsden, formerly a Labour M.P., who subsequently defected to the Liberal Democratic Party. The meeting was run and attended largely by peace campaigners. During an interval the Daily Mail was mentioned in conversation with a formidable lady, a dedicated anti-war, anti-nuclear campaigner who would have considered herself to be "Middle Class". "Oh; that rag" was the sharp response. This exposed the innate bigotry and silliness of some of those who can become involved in such movements, no less than the same deficiencies and subjective, shallow perceptions of those who assume so-called "Right Wing" positions. Some 15 years ago, the late Dr Kitty Little, an expert in the field of nuclear science, quietly demolished the arguments of an anti-Nuclear Power demonstrator with rational scientific arguments. In the end this good lady could only protest that "This is what I believe". We do not take sides. But this serves to illustrate the many emotional and subjective cross currents as one contemplates the vulnerability of society to the specious tenets of Political Correctness. We read the Daily Mail impartially and, we hope objectively, as we read The Guardian, The Independent or Communist Morning Star. If the Daily Mail reports the chaotic state of discipline and learning in certain schools, the malfunction of Law and Order, the vulnerability of the victims of crime or teenage promiscuity, then so be it. Such matters cannot be "un-made" simply because they are reflected in a newspaper that does not happen to fit one's cherished political beliefs or social prejudices. On 10th August, 2003, Peter Hitchens wrote in the Mail's sister paper the Mail on Sunday under the heading of "One man and a letter of despair that shames our liberal elite".

* How much longer are the British going to put up with the way they are being ignored by those who claim to be in charge of the country? I have tried in every way I know to tug the sleeves of the powerful and tell them that crime and disorder are out of control. But the safe, wealthy elite scornfully dismiss people such as me as alarmists. When I published a book about this issue in the spring, most of the liberal media coldly ignored it. Others just abused me and called me names. You see, crime and disorder simply aren't interesting to them because they live a long way from such things. I had a letter last week from a former soldier who does not have that luxury and I quote from it here with his per-mission. He tells me that in 1979 he bought a mid-terrace house in one of our big cities. But now, as he says: "I couldn't even give my house away, let alone sell it." Why? Because the louts and oafs who now rule so much of our country have taken over and the law has moved out. "I live next door to a drug dealer who deals in the "normal" sort of things - Ecstasy, skunk, whizz., etc. Yet although the police know all about him they will do nothing to remove him. "I have even put up with watching 80 to 90 people a day visiting, only ever for a minute or two. People smoke their puffs on my doorstep. What am I to do? The police won't help, the council won't help. I have had cars destroyed by these scum. Things are far worse than you'll ever know. I have two children, a girl of 20 and a son of 22. My daughter is terrified of going out. My son simply tries to stay away as much as possible." This letter tells of drunks roaming at all hours of the night. "They set off fireworks, damage cars, knock on your windows and kick your doors. It never ends. I have worked all my life, I have paid my taxes, I have served my country - and for what? To live in fear? Sorry, not me. I am one of those people willing to go to prison to defend my family and my property. But hang on - haven't I paid the police to do that? Someone must listen sooner or later. Mustn't they?" If this were just one letter, it would be bad enough. But it is only the most eloquent of many that I receive from people all over the country - in city and countryside, north and south - who are baffled, afraid, dispirited and angry. What I also hear about is the slow but relentless rise of dangerous political extremes among the abandoned and defenceless. People reach for such remedies because the main parties, run by the rich and the safe, are arrogantly refusing to listen.

THE ULTIMATE POWER OF MONEY

The Role Of Political Correctness

We have often explained that the ultimate earthly Power is that of Money, the method and means of its creation, and those who control it. Money acts in the manner of an electric power grid. The Power can be generated to meet perceived requirements. The flow can be directed, diverted, increased or decreased and, if need be, cut off. Everything else, from business to public services and personal finances, hangs from this like trinkets on a Christmas tree. Today, the creation of money is virtually out of control on a globalised scale. Instead of being a means for the free movement and exchange of goods and services, money is traded as a commodity in its own right. This is just as if electricity was traded between generating companies or dealers as a commodity as a primary function of electricity generation. We make one concession to the Christmas tree analogy. When business becomes so large any serious overload as in the case of the Savings and Loan (building society), scandal in the United States, debt rescheduling in Mexico or uncontrolled over-expansion of production can cause serious breakdowns in the Money "power grid", severely straining the branches of our Christmas tree; even breaking these "branches" occasionally if global banks and businesses go into meltdown as in the case of the Enron affair in the United States.

If we follow yet another analogy we create a situation of "Poverty Amidst Plenty", as in the case of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Thus there is insufficient "Money" available - Power in the "grid" - to facilitate the normal exchange and movement of the natural resources that remain plentiful and are needed to sustain us. The analogy? One would not run a train half-empty for a lack of tickets. Yet money is always made available - more "electricity" is "generated" - in time of war, if not to alleviate human suffering and deprivation. President Abraham Lincoln issued the "Greenback" during the American Civil War of 1861-63. Joint Permanent Secretary to the Treasury John Bradbury gave his name to the treasury note issued during the 1914-18 War. Thus our individual fortunes; pensions, pension funds, mortgages, debt encouraged by spending ahead of income, small businesses, are forced up and down like a yo-yo at the mercy of this artificial global market of created "Money". As we lose homes and pensions and public services collapse the Chancellor of the Exchequer robs Peter - us - to pay Paul - Bankerism - to finance huge loans and deficits on funds "created" and borrowed from the private banking system - the National Debt, instead of the Government exercising its right to create its own money. But we must not be allowed to understand this or the people might rise up in open rebellion. We must therefore be diverted and dumbed down, our independence of judgement and our thought processes must be anaesthetized. In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in February this year we examined this scenario under the title "Why A Major War Is Needed - The Global Economy And Those Who Control It"(10). This also included three specific references which merit careful reading; one by David C.Korten(11) and two by Michael Rowbotham(12)(13)..

James Gibb Stuart is a Scottish businessman, author and co-founder of the Bromsgrove Group for monetary and economic reform. Long before we raised the question of Political Correctness with him, he had coined the term "SMARM" - Socially Malleable, And Responsively Motivated. He had also written an allegory with the title "Anecdotes of a Devil's Disci-ple". This was in two parts; "The Initiate" and "Effects and causes", which we reproduce below:

"Anecdotes of a Devil's Disciple" Part I - The Initiate

I sold my soul to the Devil when I was twenty-nine years old. By that time I had acquired a degree in economics, a diploma in company law, a Ph.D. in mass psychology, a nagging degree of personal debt and a Habit that could cost as much as £500 in a single week.

On that first occasion H.M.M. (His Mephistophelian Majesty) could not have been more kind and understanding. Inviting me into His own private suite at the prestigious C.H.Q., He pointed out that since personal problems automatically became His problem for all the myriads of staff in His employ, and since the creation and administration of Debt were a particular aspect of corporate activities, I should cease to worry about the escalating financial burden. After all, He commented disarm-ingly, since Debt is something we should hesitate to use against ourselves, it would never, ever, be pressed against me whilst I remained in His service. As for the Habit, that also was an in-house situation which had to be kept under control, but supplies, when sanctioned, would be provided by one of the unlisted subsidiaries at a fraction of the street prices.

Working for the Devil is immediately identified as a unique and exclusive experience. Initiates are made to feel that they are members of a very special club, an elite who are somehow outwith and above the aff-airs of ordinary humanity. This impression is assiduously maintained at secret induction sessions where the new incumbents are quickly made the recipients and the guardians of privileged knowledge, and encouraged to regard themselves as both masters of the present and shapers of the future.

H.M.M. (Incorporated) covers such a range of diverse and appar-ently conflicting activities, that it seemed nigh impossible for one manage-ment structure to contain and administer them all. In addition to the high profile financial, industrial and commercial divisions, I noted that vast departments had been given over to religion, morality, psychology, propa-ganda and the conditioning of the human mind. It left me aghast at the sheer scale and versatility of our corporate endeavours, and innately curious at the ingenious master strategy which had obviously been conceived to weave all these disparate strands together.

Even so, I did not doubt that H.M.M. had a particular purpose for me in this mighty cosmocorp. Specialisation had been indicated at an early stage of the induction process, and soon those with specific training and acquired skills were being sought out, and directed into the tasks that best befitted their aptitudes. In my case it had obviously been decided, on qualifications and previous experience, that I should be employed in the field of economics.

I was good at economics - not the numbers or the practicalities or the application as such - frankly I'd never really got to grips with the seven-times table - but the jargon and the analyses, and all that flurry of figures and statistics that so impressed the market. I could quote extensively from the textbook, and argue and pontificate with conviction, and my rhetoric in a rowdy conference hall could score points against the most calculating and well documented opponent.

In my time I had also studied, briefly but memorably, at the Broughton School for Advanced Jargonese, whose successful graduates could always he expected to pull out a complicated technical phrase or some high sounding expression of involved methodology where it was most needed. Critics were instinctively wary of attacking an alleged expert who could speak casually and convincingly about integrated management flexibility or responsive transitional contingencies. None of them would have any idea what it meant if indeed it meant anything at all but they would never want to admit it.

In the training cadres and lecture auditoriums of His Mephistophelian Majesty my most eloquent presentations were received without comment, but when the induction courses ended, I was duly posted to a professional environment where both my background of legalistics and my command of textbook economics would be put to full advantage. I became part of the most unassuming, yet altogether critically important department within the Company's vast and sprawling network. With my new colleagues I would become responsible for projecting and protecting the corporate image in the sphere of public relations.

Nothing about H.M.M. (Incorporated) was more unique than its sensitivity to public perceptions within indigenous society and in the market place. I was soon to find that no expense would he spared, no consumption of time and trouble considered disproportionate, for ensuring that the Company's profile and policies on all relevant matters were in conformity with the established norms. Environmentally friendly! Politically correct! Ethnically compatible! These, and others of a like nature, were the concepts and catch phrases which I would always have to keep before me in my interface with the modern communications media which carried our message to a wider public. Those early studies at the Broughton School would not be wasted.

Even in those situations where Company strategy and the overriding profit motive left ethnic or environmental issues some long way behind, it was still a paramount necessity to ensure that our image remained untarnished within the popular domain. Thus judiciously financed research could occasionally establish a hazardous waste as a public good, and closure of manufacturing plants with much loss of local employment was downsizing to improve industrial efficiency. Black could become white if one adjusted the lighting, and even the malodorous be made to smell sweet.

Euphemisms of this genre were second nature once one had thoroughly absorbed and understood corporate policy. The Company had its own private code of conduct, ethics and morality. For the initiated it was a very easy code to follow. Broadly what was right and proper in any given situation was whatever happened to concur with the guidelines from Head Office, and it then became the task of Public Relations to reconcile the contradictions for instance as between local economic downturn and rising Company profits internationally.

With the vast resources for research and controlled communication of ideas that had been placed at our disposal, even that was not an impossible assignment. We simply resurrected a nineteenth century ideal and offered it as a unique latter day virtue. Industrial wastelands were being created, skills and prospects destroyed, communities reduced to drugs and crime and hopelessness, but with proper handling and media overkill, it could all be presented as progressive and inevitable within the principles and the philosophy of the Free Market.

When I reflected at times on what had been accomplished, I realised that it could not have been achieved through normal public relations skills alone. There was an element of thought transference and mind conditioning at a very high level in many of our initiatives, and when I saw how readily and how regularly state treasuries and prime ministers could be made to fall in line with our objectives, I began to suspect the existence within our sprawling Company structure of individuals and agencies with both the prestige and the influence to control events.

It gave me new insights into the potential, and the ultimate ambitions, of my new boss, His Mephistophelian Highness. H.M.M. (Incorporated), that many faceted conglomerate enterprise, was both a symbol and an embodiment of Power, power that radiated outwards and downwards to command the attention and the supine cooperation of governments, chancelleries, academics, leaders of thought and political opinion in every civilised corner of the globe.

In fact H.M.M. (or UM squared, as the maths. boys called him) was bidding to become Master of the World. In some trepidation, yet driven by an insatiable curiosity, I aspired to learn the Secret of His Power.

"Anecdotes of a Devil's Disciple" Part II - Effects And Causes

Life was comfortable. I still had my Habit, but supplies were ready available, and I was managing to keep it under control. The Debt had gone quiescent. It had not been cancelled, just placed under a moratorium, no doubt as an earnest of good behaviour. The organisation owned me, but there was a light touch upon the restraints that held me in check.

I had made friends, consciously and deliberately, with older and longer established colleagues, amongst them some who had obviously made their choice, and were content to carry out each twist and turn of Company policy without qualm or question. Foremost of these was Fred, who was in charge of my department. He was a calm, superior type of individual, always apparently in full command of himself and the situation, whatever that happened to be. We would occasionally have a quiet drink together after the day's business was over, and I got to value those little encounters, especially when they gave me opportunity to ask his views on matters that concerned me.

He was not at all reluctant to confess what working with the Devil had done for him. "It's been very good for me," he declared one evening as we sat together. I can tell you I had scarcely two bits to rub together when I joined the organisation. Now I've got a place in the shires, and a catamaran straining at its moorings in the Monte Carlo marina."

"Well, you're different, I suppose. I can't get used to thinking of myself as a fixture. You just seem to belong.".

"I didn't actually start here, any more than you did," he retorted, "though true to popular legend, the Boss did indeed take me into a high place, and tell me much of what I saw could be mine. The high place was His penthouse suite, with a splendid view of the City, and He's been as good as His word, for much that I saw that night is now mine. I've had insider information on every takeover and merger both here and in New York over the last ten years, and as you can imagine, it paid off rather well. So why should I want to give all that up?"

"Well, you know," I stumbled awkwardly. "Immortal soul and all that! The threat of hellfires and eternal damnation! Does it not worry you?"

"It's never actually been proved," he replied calmly. "Have you been reading the Bible or something?"

"Every now and then I think of it. Buying myself out, I mean. There must be something I can do."

"What? At your age? Don't even think of it. Not even with a cool million in the bank. Can't you see that we're winning all the way? With His Satanic Majesty up there in front, who's going to stop us?"

"Sorry," I said apologetically. "It's just that I occasionally get nightmares about the hereafter."

"What you need, old boy," said Fred cosily, "is some sense of historical perspective. Our Old Man's been around for a very long time. You and I are mortal, creatures of the technological age computers, telescreens and electronic transfer. But the Boss was plying His trade away back there in Ancient Babylon, when the scribes did their writings on papyrus, and you posted things by mule or camel. So He's known how to adjust with the times, and He's fought off plenty of challenges, like that affair with Jesus of Nazareth in the days of the Roman Empire."

"Yes, but Jesus defied Him on that occasion," I exclaimed. "Part of the temptations of Christ, wasn't it? He was taken up to the high place, and told everything could he his. But according to the scriptures, he wouldn't he tempted."

"Okay, okay" agreed Fred equably. "He got away with it that time. But he didn't know how to quit when he was winning. He soon got his comeuppance, after he interfered with the moneychangers. Now that was something the Boss couldn't afford to let anyone get away with, not even today."

"You mean when Christ threw the moneychangers out of the Temple?" I stared at him open mouthed. "I had no idea that had anything to do with well, what we're doing now."

"Of course it had. As I've already explained, it's a matter of acquiring a sense of historical perspective. It helps you to understand that when this wandering preacher struck at the moneychangers, he was striking at a vital corporate monopoly. The Company just had to strike back."

"The Company? In that temple at Jerusalem? In the days of donkey transport? So how did the Boss get to hear of it?"

"Frankly I couldn't tell you. Let's assume that with communica-tions on the primitive side, He had to leave a bit of latitude with His lieutenants. But they certainly acted fast, whoever they were. It was only a matter of weeks before they had him crucified, and it was a salutary lesson most people were unlikely to forget."

"Yes, Christ died on the cross," I mused, "but he was reported to have risen again after three days. And through his resurrection, didn't the Christians turn it into a triumph?"

"They would, wouldn't they?" remarked Fred, reaching for his glass. "And I suppose that down through the centuries they of all people must have given H.M.M. no end of trouble. But He's had the patience to outstay them, and now, in print, on screen or television, we can have them maligned, ridiculed and discredited whenever the whim takes us. I'd say that nowadays we're playing the Christians like a ju jitsu wrestler handles a stronger opponent, turning their own strength against them."

"And you really think we can prevail, even with this terrible promise of a Day of Judgement in the hereafter?"

Said Fred, "You seem to have an obsession with the hereafter. And as I told you already, it's never actually been proved. Personally I'll stick to what I see happening down here and what I see as a winning play."

I thought for a moment. "With the Christians," I ventured at length, "what did you mean about using their own strength to defeat them?"

"Remember your philosophy classes?" he asked at that. "All those repetitive illustrations about separating cause from effect! Well we've got the whole damn Church of Christ Crucified dissipating its energies on the effects whilst apparently ignoring the causes. Take this recent controversy over Third World Debt for instance. They've made quite a houha about those miserable suckers down there south of Capricorn, who've had to starve themselves to meet the interest charges. There have been umpteen conferences in as many countries, preaching compassion and atonement, even a millennium accord on debt forgiveness. The Christian charities have gone into it in a big way, raising relief supplies to feed the hungry, all the way from the Congo to the Philippines and the Matto Grosso. No doubt they've come canvassing the Boss for a subscription. And no doubt He's tipped them a million or two from His petty cash tray He finds it pays to he generous in such instances. But of course none of it affects His vital interests."

"So what are the vital interests?" I asked curiously.

Fred did not answer immediately, and when he did speak, it was with a different tone in his voice. "You're the economist" he observed pointedly. "And you've seen the leverage we've been able to exert against the debtor countries in regard to their resources. Debt forgiveness was our concept. It was the Company which first offered it to them in exchange for a lien on their resources. Knowing our Mephistophelian Master," he continued with a sly grin, "I reckon that was probably a good enough reason for getting them into debt in the first place."

"So what you're really saying is that all those Christian charities, with their gigantic relief efforts, have got the wrong end of the problem entirely. They're sort of running about mopping up the bathroom floor without thinking to turn off the tap."

"I'm saying" declared Fred smoothly, "that whatever happens, H.M.M. always stays in control. The churches and the Red Cross and the bleeding hearts are doing the running about and the mopping up, but He's got His hands on the tap. He determines the causes, they deal with the effects. Still wonder why I'm not worried about the Day of Judgement?"

"No, I can see what you're getting at," I told him. "They get all the trouble and expense of running the relief operations, whilst we get control of the resources. But is there no one out there who's smart enough to realise what's going on?"

"Of course there is," he replied quietly. "There's plenty of them, probably within the churches themselves. But this is where you have to be impressed with the immensity of the Boss's power. He crucified Christ after that threat to His corporate monopoly, and nowadays even the holiest and most devout of Christian ministers seems reluctant to join his Lord and climb the hill to Calvary."

"I can't imagine crucifixion being regarded as much of a threat nowadays," I remarked with an attempt at jocularity. "You suggest they're all afraid of the Old Man? Yet there's many a tubthumping priest who blasts the Devil from his pulpit every Sunday morning."

"Oh they don't mind confounding the Devil from the pulpit. What they never get down to is criticising the works of the Devil in the larger social context. There's few of them bold enough to throw the money changers out of their own particular temple."

"Why?"

"It's likely to be rather expensive, that's why. Like everybody else these days, the churches need plenty of funding to pay the bills, run their charities, and see that the clergy have a comfortable living. If they were to become too curious and obstructive about the corporate monopoly, they might just discover that their sources of finance were drying up."

"The corporate monopoly!" I repeated. "It's a money monopoly, isn't it? The Boss keeps people in line by putting a stranglehold on their finances, and if they step too far out of line, I suppose they can be utterly destroyed."

"Debt, scandals, exposure, public humiliation and social degrada-tion! There are more ways of crucifying people than by nailing them to a cross, and in his time the Old Man has probably refined them all."

"And it's the money monopoly that's important," I said, trying to get my thoughts in order. "That's the one that has to be preserved at all costs."
"Even if it means murder, mayhem, terror, starvation and an occa-sional resort to bloody conquest." Fred had finished his drink, and looked as if he was about to leave. "Some people call it the monopoly of credit. And it is indeed the most important thing the Old Man has going for him."

"Would you say that it's the Secret of His Power?"

"You might say that. In the global scheme of things, financial power is the ultimate power."

There was much more I wanted to ask him, but he was on his feet, and I had to he satisfied with what I had already heard. It was all useful, and let me see a number of things more clearly. I knew that thenceforth I had to concentrate on the money issue.

CHARTING THE PATH OF ULTIMATE POWER

We have stated that Political Correctness cannot logically be an end in itself. It must therefore function in the service of some far greater Force, or Power. We intend to examine this relationship in its various dimensions in future editions of On Target. In doing so we realise that to identify Political Correctness in this light may be seen as something of an act of faith. The problem is that if one ignores this and accepts Political Correct-ness at face value, this inexorable process could well generate nations of Orwellian human "sheep" within a few generations. Then it will be too late. A few years ago we purchased, quite by chance, The Official Politic-ally Correct Dictionary And Handbook (14). This contained an almost unimaginable catalogue of definitions, supported by no less than 34 pages of references. The book was published in the outward style of a popular, even satirical paperback. But when we suggested this to Dr Frank Ellis, he stressed the deadly seriousness of the book. The more one studies the extent, depth and origins of Political Correctness the more compelling this uncomfortable truth becomes.

James Gibb Stuart has given us one vision of Ultimate Power from which our awareness and understanding must be diverted. This Satanic dimension has a clear link to The New Testament of The Holy Bible. We may see our destiny here in The Book of Revelations. From the roots of The Holy Bible comes another dimension; that of The Old Testament. Let us call this the Power of Political Zionism as expressed by Winston Chur-chill in his conveniently ignored article in The Illustrated Sunday Herald of 8th February, 1920 on International Jewry, what we commonly term "Organised Jewry", under the heading "Zionism versus Bolshevism. A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People"(15). The seeds of this Power were sewn in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion(16). First translated by Victor Marsden from the Russian in 1920, this book is understandably detested by almost all people of Jewish origin. It is ritually condemned as a vile "forgery", but this is quite false; any forgery has to have an original. On the other hand, no people can be homogeneous. The vast majority of Jewish people, including those no longer of the Jewish faith, have no part in this. Nevertheless, the Protocols forecast reasonably accurately what is coming to pass in this growth of Power across the world. The United Kingdom with a population of 59,000,000, Germany, 83,000,000 and France, 59,500,000 have ultimately shown themselves subservient to the economic and political Power of the United States, 280,000,000. The Po-wer of Organised Jewry, through bodies like the World Jewish Congress extends its influence to every major Nation in the world. Israel, with a pop-ulation of a mere 6,000,000, leads United States foreign policy by the nose through American-Jewish organisations and political groups like the so-called "Neoconservatives", whose primary loyalty is to Israel. Israel milks the United States taxpayer to the tune of some $8,000,000,000 annually. Israel is a major armaments manufacturer and dealer. Protected by the United States from international censure, Israel has developed a massive arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction. No other Nation in history has wielded such Power. To ignore this second obvious factor would be pusillanimous self-delusion and would also seriously distort the equation.

Three other factors must be taken into account at this stage. First is that in 1926 Soviet agent Mikhail Borodin informed Madame Chiang Kai-shek that the Communist World Revolution exploited the destabilising and idealistic philosophies of Liberal idealism and Intellectualism(17). Sec-ondly, despite the anti-Elitist, Egalitarian basis of this Liberal-Libertarian thinking, no such thinking existed in Marxist philosophy. In his interview with the German writer Emil Ludwig, Comrade Stalin, dealing with this question [Equalitarianism], made an express reference to The Critique of the Gotha Programme(18):

* The sort of Socialism in which everyone receives the same wages, the same quantity of meat, the same quantity of bread, wears just the same clothes, and receives the same products in the same quantity - such a Socialism is unknown to Marxism. Marxism only says: until the final annihilation of classes, and until labour, instead of being a means to existence, has become the first necessity of life - voluntary labour for society - everyone will be paid for his labour in accordance with the work done. . . . It is absolutely clear that different people have different needs and will continue to have them under Socialism. Socialism has never excluded difference of taste, of quantity and quality in individual needs. . . . Equalitarianism arises from the peasant mode of thought, the psychology of dividing everything up equally, the psychology of primitive peasant "Communism". Equalitarianism has nothing in common with Marxist Socialism (Emphasis added)

The third factor is that of the Globalisation of Power in the service of Mammon, Bankerism and the Trans-National Corporations. In his report "American-led Empire's Planned Global Military Domination", of 7th July, 2003, Craig Hulet points out in the following paragraph that in the role of the United States as the obvious epicentre of this Power, ordinary American people, themselves a primary target of Political Correctness, are no less vulnerable, as a Nation-State, to these forces:

* The Monroe Doctrine asserted Washington's "international police pow-er" to intervene against "chronic wrongdoing, or an importance which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society." The new and proposed deployments are being justified by similar rhetoric. Just substitute "globalization" for "civilization". The emerging Pentagon doctrine, . . . argues that it is precisely countries and regions that are "disconnected" from the prevail-ing trends of economic globalization that posed the greatest dangers. "Discon-nectedness is one of the great danger signs around the world," Bebrowski told an audience at the Heritage Foundation last month in an update of the "general loosening of the ties of civilized society" formula of a century ago. . . . This empire is, while seemingly familiar in many past regards, a "corporate empire" to benefit the monopoly corporation's elite, stock holders, outright majority owners and the "banking fraternity" inextricably intertwined within Corporat-ism's circle of friends. . . . But understand what is missing in these above very good analyst's works: This empire is not, I must repeat, a simple Roman model, but a corporate model which leaves America as a nation-state a simple cog in the wheel, and Americans simple subjects to the corporate dictate; which may well leave Americans scrambling for jobs in far off lands; scrambling for work and food here at home; scrambling for understanding why they were duped. And so easily it would seem. (Emphasis added).

BOOK REVIEW
by "Kitz"
The Politics Of The Forked Tongue - Authoritarian Liberalism. By Aidan Rankin. New European Publications Limited, 2002.

This book is about freedom, the freedom to choose when one wants to sit down in familiar surroundings to have a cup of tea or to sit sucking one's pipe in a leather chair in some London club. Rankin wants us to be like that and not be part of an intrusive society each with his political antennas at full stretch to identify with some group or other shouting from each roof top about the search for an illusory equality.

In essence this review could stop here, but reading the book is a chilling reminder of what is being done to us by the New Liberals in the interest of doing good. Rankin's argument about the forked tongue is that people don't want to read about these issues along with their breakfast coffee but rather leave them to be submerged in the traditional goodness of the ordinary Englishmen. In other words by the individual putting sensitive issues like race in the public domain is only raising the temp-erature surrounding them. Like race, for example, our nation has always been a refuge for immigrants and they have always been absorbed without much fuss or bother, so let it be so.

How Jeff, Rankin's New-Liberal, would arch his back at such an observation. But it is one of the redeeming features of our society that it is able to question the aggressive politics associated with New Liberalism. This would be beyond his comprehension. According to Rankin what he advocates in the absence of great causes, now such issues are no more - socialist at one time, in the shape of the great movements of the 1940s and 1950s, whereby there were genuine attempts to meet the day-to-day wishes of the poor - is instead the seeking out of new causes upon which the New Liberals have alighted in force; cultural issues to be forced down our throats in the belief that they are so correct or right that they cannot be wrong.

And this is what Rankin regards as the core belief in his book - the issue of political correctness fostered by the New Liberals.

Political correctness Rankin asserts, is no fad. We may be amused by some of its idiocies, but there is within it a threat to our daily lives. We can laugh at calling a person conducting a meeting by referring to him or her as a piece of furniture or as one friend suggested what would one call a manhole cover, but when it comes to liberal authoritarianisms as part of the same coin as globalism, then we could be in trouble. Political correctness has a longer history than most of us think. Lenin and Stalin used it to shape a society doing their own bidding and those who didn't go along with their thoughts and beliefs were politically incorrect. They thought of themselves as do-gooders and in order to achieve their revolutionary aims in this way ended up in creating dictatorships, with consequences known to us all. Rankin sees in our societies dangerous elements associated with such thinking. He refers to the suffocating, dumbing down of New Liberals with similar Leninist fervour who want us all to think the same way. We only have to look over the past to see what this means - a supine society whose vision of contentment does not lie in anything resembling tradition or common sense, but instead by the contentment supplied by the nearest burger bar. Rankin argues that we don't want this here, although it is already well advanced as our New Liberals - the Blairs and the Hoons would prefer us to remain in our mental straightjackets and accept their strictures upon how we should run our lives. We don't want targets, we want doctors and nurses doing their jobs in the way they know how. We don't want history teachers almost afraid to talk of the great struggles for liberty for fear that the syllabus will miss out on race or the female struggle for recognition - feminism.

Here, Rankin reminds us of yet another feature of political correctness which has a forked tongue impact upon society, involving over 50 per cent of our population. New Liberals of the ilk of Rankin's Jeff would have women behaving as men, shedding their instinctive femininity to such an extent that their place in the home, for those who wish it, is derided. Their standing alongside males in military combat says the New Liberal is accepted, but no thought is given to the natural reaction of a masculine male who might wish to shelter her from the immediate horror of warfare or even more reach out to protect her if she is injured.

In many ways these thoughts in this review may come as random thoughts but instinctively when reading this book, one cannot but feel that the search for equality rather than freedom accounts for many of the ills we suffer at present. For example, the way comprehensive education has been brutalised has left us with a society where reaching for the largest common denominator has left us with a youth culture where tradition means nothing or at most very little and the youth who goes against the grain, that is, against the enforced political correctness of some educationists and politicians are left with little space to exercise their beliefs.

This book is undoubtedly a major contribution to a close examina-tion of our society, and where, unless we are careful, it will go. Do we want to forego our traditions in the interests of authoritarian New Liberals whose every word is aimed at group culture? Do we want an Orwellian society in which we treat the world along routes prescribed by to us by do-gooders? Do we want to lose the gift of a society which does nothing more than lift an eyelid. When confronted by eccentricity? Obviously not. We want the cricket pitch and our cup of tea, we want to treasure our liberty and surely we know in the end that we will never give them up.

BOOK REVIEW
by Adrian Lamont

Seven Steps to Justice - Two basic Incomes for All. Capital Ownership for All. A Proper Deal for Women. Solution to Middle East and Kashmir by Rodney Shakespeare & Peter Challen. Foreword by Peter Selby, Bishop of Worcester. New European Publications Limited, 2002.

The book opens with a prayer which includes the following lines: "At a time when many things are clothed in deceit may we be frank in our dealings with one another". This is the theme of the book. In fact it is so frank that some of the solutions it recommends are almost unbelievable. All conventional notions of economics have to be put aside. The authors, Rodney Shakespeare and Peter Challen, both members of the Bromsgrove Group describe seven steps to answer the world's problems - in a radical new way.

The scene is set - there is a dirty bomb terrorist attack in a neigh-bouring town. How did all this come about? There follows a summary of world injustices, the misuse of world monetary systems and an introduction to "Binary Economics". The main objective of Binary Econo-mics is that all individuals should have two sources of income, one from his [their?] labour and the other from capital. The nearest institution we currently have for sharing capital is the Employee Share Ownership Plan (E.S.O.P.), created by Louis Kelso. But in Binary Economics the whole process of raising loans is organised in such a way that everybody gets a share of the capital, when the loan is repaid. This amounts to a basic income for all. Income from labour is then added on top of this. Essential to this thinking is that governments are empowered to create money and provide interest-free loans. This action is deflationary providing the loan actually generates wealth in the community and nil interest ensures the value of this wealth is not inflated by adding interest money into the economic system. For conventional economists, it must be a strange thought that it is the interest and expansion of accounts (banks creating ledger money), which leads to inflation.

Well - what are the seven steps to greater social justice?:

Step 1 is the acknowledgement that the present banking system is pretty fraudulent* - a monopoly based on debt and interest.

Step 2 proposes setting up Community Investment Corporations for public service investment. Their task would be to manage money loaned by the government - interest free.

Step 3 proposes similar loans to the Private Sectors. In return companies would be required to issue shares to their employees.

Step 4 - interest-free loans for small businesses.

Step 5 - Government should provide a basic income for all - funded out of the deflationary measures suggested in Steps 1 - 4.

Step 6. Women to play a significant role in implementing two basic incomes for all.

Step 7. Setting up the Abraham Society and Kashmiriat Society (multi-ethnic societies), to solve the problems in the Middle East and Kashmir.

A last word in comment - is it possible that nations across the world have been conned into believing they have to borrow money from the I.M.F. (International Monetary Fund), or World Bank? Could they not simply create their own loan money? In a properly regulated binary economy, there would be no need to borrow with interest. The problem in a nutshell is that, in the past, bankers have developed the expertise in regulating money - and most governments when they interfere mess it up or become corrupt. It is heady stuff "creating" money. So perhaps we need new institutions, both local, national and international - councils (or watchdogs?), which can develop the necessary expertise and eventually take over the regulatory functions from the banks.

This book is a valuable starting point for anyone interested in radical economics.

* A high profile recent case of bank fraud was the highly publicised Enron and WorldCom scandal when major banks were implicated and fined for "ripping off" their own customers.

Note on the Author: Adrian Lamont is currently Treasurer of the Oswestry Coalition for Peace.

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) Douglas, C.H. The Tragedy of Human Effort (The Liverpool Address, October, 1936). K.R.P. Publications Limited. £2.00.
(2) Political Correctness and the Ideological Struggle: From Lenin and Mao to Marcuse and Foucault. Dr Frank Ellis. The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, Vol. 27, No. 4, Winter 2002.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Conspiracy, Revolution And Moral Decay. Published in 2 parts. On Target, Vol. 29, Nos. 6 - 9, 11th & 25th September and 9th & 23rd October, 1999.
(5) Political Correctness and the Ideological Struggle: From Lenin and Mao to Marcuse and Foucault. Op. cit.
(6) Ibid.
(7) Ibid.
(8) "The Trend Of International Affairs Since The War". A Paper by Arnold J. Toynbee at the Fourth Annual Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Relations, held at Copenhagen on June 8th - 10th, 1931. The Social Crediter, Vol. 60, No. 2, March-April, 1981. £2.00.
(9) Martin, Rose L. Fabian Freeway - High Road To Socialism In The U.S.A. - 1884-1966. Western Islands, 1966.

(10) On Target, Vol. 32, Nos. 7 & 8, 5th & 19th October and Nos 9, 10, 11, 2nd, 16th & 30th November, 2002.
(11) Korten, David C. When Corporations Rule the World. Kumarian Press and Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc., 1995, revised 2001. £16.75.*
(12) Rowbotham, Michael. Goodbye America! Globalisation, debt and the dollar empire. Jon Carpenter, 2000. £13.25.
(13) Rowbotham, Michael. The Grip of Death - A study of modern money, debt slavery and destructive economics. Jon Carpenter, 1998. £17.95.
(14) Beard, Henry, and Christopher Cerf. The Official Politically Correct Dictionary And Handbook. Harper Collins, 1994.
(15) "Zionism versus Bolshevism. A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People". The Illustrated Sunday Herald, 8th February, 1920.
(16) The Protocols Of The Meetings Of The Learned Elders Of Zion. Translated from the Russian of Sergyei A. Nilus by Victor E. Marsden. U.K. edition £10.00; U.S. edition, £14.95.
(17) Chiang Kai-shek, Madame. Conversations With Mikhail Borodin. Privately published, c1978.
(18) Marx, Karl. Critique of the Gotha Programme. Martin Lawrence, 1933. Completely revised, edited and annotated. The only edition authorized by the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute Moscow.
­ The two books subject to our Book Reviews are available, both price £10.95.
Further material may be found in the Bloomfield Books Stock Price List (S.P.L.). This is available from the address below. Prices for all material include postage in the United Kingdom. Overseas orders add 20% for surface mail (Europe add 20% for automatic air mail) or 55% for airmail. (U.S. readers should add 65% after adding postage to the U.K. prices, and send payment in U.S. dollars with a cheque drawn on a bank in the U.S.A. made payable to "Donald A. Martin"). All from Donald A. Martin, Bloomfield Books at: 26 Meadow Lane, Sudbury, Suffolk, England, CO10 2TD.

EXTRA COPIES: As a service to our readers, extra copies and back numbers of On Target are available at £2 for a single copy, £1.50 each for 2 - 10 copies, 75p each for 11 - 50 copies, and over 50 copies at 50p each. (Quantity prices only apply per issue). These are U.K. prices. For overseas readers add percentages as shown above for Bloomfield Books.

ON TARGET INDEXES. These are available from Bloomfield Books, currently for Volumes 22-31. The price is 50 pence per copy, per volume (all 10 volumes - £4.00). See address below.

On Target is printed and published by Intelligence Publications (U.K.)
26 Meadow Lane, SUDBURY, Suffolk, ENGLAND CO10 2TD.

By private subscription only at the following rates:

U.K. - £20 per annum
U.S.A. - Surface Mail U.S.$45 per annum- Air Mail U.S.$50 per annum
Elsewhere overseas - Surface Mail £25 per annum - Air Mail £30 per annum

Reproduction, without prior agreement, of the contents of this publication is subject to the acknowledgment of the source, together with the address and subscription rates, and provided a copy of any reproduction is sent immediately to the publisher.

Editor and Publisher: Donald A. Martin Copyright © D.A. Martin
Deputy Editor and Research Department: Barry S. Turner