THE BRITISH ELECTORAL BACKLASH

by Eric D. Butler.

During my 1973 lecture and fact-finding tour in the United Kingdom I formed the firm opinion that there was a deep undercurrent of electoral resentment against both the Conservative and Labour parties. I found little evidence to suggest that the rising electoral support for Mr. Jeremy Thorpe's Liberal Party was other than a protest vote. That protest vote expressed itself strongly in the British elections, but those commentators who claim that this was a positive vote by British electors searching for a "middle way" are deluding themselves and those who heed their views.

Edward Heath was the main victim of the British electoral backlash. In spite of an economic situation that should have been favourable to his plea for an increased mandate, the British electors made it clear that they had had enough of Heath and his policies. Not even the economic crisis caused large numbers of electors to forget Heath's Common Market policies and the impact of those policies on British food prices. Although there has been no great enthusiasm for Harold Wilson amongst British Electors for years, when he was at last forced into the position where he had to give a firm assurance that the British people would be given a say on the Common Market if he formed a Government, the way was cleared for Mr. Enoch Powell to use his tremendous influence to persuade British electors to vote for the Labor Party in protest against a Conservative Party which had betrayed its own pre-election promises.

Although the press commentators have attempted to "play down" the role of Powell in the British elections, there is no doubt whatever that he persuaded large numbers of electors, reluctant though they may have been, to record a vote for Harold Wilson as a protest against Edward Heath. In view of the small Labour majority over the Conservatives, it is certain that the Powell strategy in the last week of the campaign was decisive.

The Northern Irish electoral backlash against the Heath Government was also a major feature of the British elections. Ulster electors have sent a message to Westminster that Harold Wilson cannot ignore. Eleven out of the twelve Ulster electorates have been won by candidates completely rejecting, the Heath Government's policies. One of the casualties was revolutionary Bernadette Devlin, who suffered a massive defeat. And then there is the "Celtic fringe" protest, which sent not only Scots Nationalists, but also Welsh Nationalists to Westminster.

The overall picture is, therefore, one of a fragmented British electorate no longer confined to traditional party loyalties. I believe that this pattern of voting is going to spread through Australia and other countries as electors become disillusioned with the failure of present parties to solve the mounting finance-economic-social problems. The British protest vote has produced what can be regarded as the best possible political result at present. It will enable a short breathing space in which the British electors can take serious stock of their basic problems, the major one being inflation.

LEAGUE OF RIGHTS IN TOP GEAR

The enthusiastic audience of 300, which turned out to hear Mr. Eric Butler at the recent meeting in Adelaide, reflected the growing upsurge of League activities right throughout Australia. 100 Guests attended the Perth Conservative Club to hear Mr. Butler, and Regional Dinners and luncheons in W.A. were also well attended. Increasing numbers of politicians are starting to appear at League functions. In spite of a nasty little intimidation campaign, Senator Neville Bonner recently addressed a highly successful Brisbane Conservative Club dinner. Mr. Jeremy Lee has more requests for meetings than he can handle.

The Nation-wide distribution of the League's brochure exposing the Socialist strategy for destroying the States and Local Government is having a big impact amongst Municipal Councillors, many requesting the League's assistance. The Save our State Movement in Queensland has also asked the League to provide specialist advice and assistance. The League's full-time team has been strengthened by Mr. Chas. Pinwill. Exciting reports are coming in of the campaigning of Mr. and Mrs. Chas. Eley, now operating full time with their slide programmes. They will be working southwards later in the year. The Heritage campaign is producing tens of thousands of new contacts. A massive pre 'Senate and Referendum' campaign has been planned. But all this requires an adequate flow of money. Since last week 13 supporters advanced the Basic Fund by $470.00. The total now stands at $24,033.44. Please send YOUR contribution immediately.

THE AUSTRALIAN CONSERVATIVE PARTY

A number of readers have asked whether or not we have any relationship with the newly formed Australian Conservative Party. As it has been suggested in some circles that the new party is a "front" for the Australian League of Rights, we wish to make it clear that the League is a strict non-party organisation and that it has no association, official or unofficial, with any political party. With the greatest respect for the founders of the Conservative Party, whose frustrations with the existing political parties we well understand, we feel that their project makes no realistic contribution to Australia's basic problems. We can therefore no more endorse the Conservative Party than can we endorse any other Party.

The League's view, which has been constantly stated over the years, is that the essential changes in policies necessary to avoid even worse disasters than those already suffered, are only going to come about through sufficient electors united to force individual Members of Parliament, irrespective of their labels, to work for those policies. It may be that Conservative Party candidates will be more amenable to electoral control than other candidates. If so, then no doubt electors will support them.

The regeneration of society must begin with individuals. Hard work and much dedicated effort is necessary. We believe that those working in Electors' Associations are making a much more constructive contribution to the cause of genuine conservatism than by fragmenting the electors by the creation of yet one more political party.

Many League supporters are, of course, members of political parties. This is their right. Each individual must make his own judgment concerning where he can most effectively work in society. But the League of Rights' formal policy concerning party politics is quite clear and we trust that our short comment will leave no one in any doubt as to where the League stands.

REGIONALISM TAKES SHAPE

Mr. John Riddell, an officer from the Department of Urban and Regional Development, met in Horsham, Victoria, with representatives of 15 Wimmera municipalities on February 27th. Councillor Keith Oldfield, of the Lowan Shire, which has declined to join any region, asked Mr. Riddell the following question: "In view of the fact that he who pays the piper calls the tune are you sure that the Federal Government, through the provision of finance, or the withholding of it, is not endeavouring to sway the community in a certain direction?" Mr. Riddell replied, "No, I am not sure.

The Wimmera-Mail Times of March 1 reports on the conference with Mr. Riddell and also publishes the following penetrating comments by staff reporter Mr. Leo O'Leary. The article, an excellent one, is too long for us to reproduce in full, so we must content ourselves with quoting excerpts only:
"He (Mr. Riddell) was able to explain that his Department had no charter to take control of Local Government...He explained that the Grants commission would provide funds in a broad way, not to finance individual projects, but to lift the general standard of municipalities to an acceptable level. But... acceptable to whom ?.. . How much money will be available to the Grants Commission for distribution to councils? No one knows...that will be in the next Federal Budget. Is this the first move towards concentrated centralism and direct control from Canberra? Tut! Tut: That's political!
Academics are having a wonderful time too. They are compiling cumbersome reports on such aspects as demography, piling up facts that councillors mostly know from personal experience. ...Politicians conceived this so-called system. They can also direct or change it any way they decide... The concept is not peculiar to the Labor Party; Mr. Gorton was fond of centralism too. (Well we know. Ed ...They (taxpayers) will pay for a huge bureaucracy they don't need ...councils may get more money, or less. Who knows? It will be in the Budget.

NO CONSPIRACIES PLEASE: WE ARE "INTELLECTUALS"

According to the pseudo-intellectuals, the type of people who thought Stalin was a Saint, anyone suggesting conspiracy in world affairs needs help from a psychiatrist - preferably a devotee of Freud. In 1966 The Macmillan Company, New York, published a 1,300 page volume, Tragedy and Hope - A history Of The World In Our Time, by the eminent American historian, Dr. Carrol Quigley. Quigley's status is such that not even the "intellectuals" can call him a "right-wing fascist beast". He formerly taught at Harvard and Princeton Universities and later became professor of history at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University in Washington. D.C.

Whatever his motives, Dr. Quigley, writing, as he said, with first-hand knowledge, described the link between international financial groups and world revolution. The men with the real power were working to re-make the world, they meant well and it was now too late anyhow to do anything to halt their programme. This was the essence of Dr. Quigley's message.

When Dr. Cleon Skousen, former top investigator for the American F.B.I., and internationally-recognised authority on Communism, read Tragedy and Hope he found authoritative confirmation of views he had reached through years of first hand experience concerning the Communist conspiracy. But he also found that Dr. Quigley took fright at the proposal that the more revealing parts of his history should be quoted and widely publicised. However, Skousen went ahead to use Quigley as the basis for his work, The Naked Capitalist. Suddenly Quigley's book became difficult to obtain and eventually "unavailable". The wide circulation of The Naked Capitalist, and the even wider circulation of Gary Allen's None Dare Call it Conspiracy, resulted in Quigley being quoted as saying that he had not expressed the views attributed to him. The difficulty in obtaining his book may be judged by the fact that some Americans have had to pay up to $40.00 a copy of Tragedy and Hope. International Bookfinders Inc. offers us a copy at $250. The original price was $12.50!

ZIONIST-COMMUNIST CONFLICT IN MIDDLE EAST BEGINS TO DIVIDE SOCIALIST LEFT

"Mr. Hawke, who is also A.L.P. President, is strongly pro-Israel and has criticised the 'even-handed' policy of the Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam". - The Sun (Melbourne), March 4th.

Mr. W. Hartley, a prominent member of the Victorian Executive of the A.L.P., is strongly pro-Arab; the two have clashed before. A number of senior union delegates to the State A.L.P. Council meeting in Melbourne on the 3rd. disagree strongly with Mr. Hawke's strong support for Israel. The Council voted to uphold Mr. Whitlam's policy of 'even-handedness' towards the Middle East. The apparent conflict (we use the word 'apparent' advisedly) between Zionism and Communism in the Middle East is now forcing the members of the Socialist Left not only in Australia, but also in other Western Countries to "take sides". It then becomes a matter of ideology.

Many Socialists have traditionally been pro-Zionist. Indeed, from the dawn of this century, and well before, many Zionists have been in the van of Socialist movements. Those Socialists, well on the Left ideologically (e.g. our own Mr. Bill Hartley) naturally follow the Moscow or Peking line (broadly in agreement on the Middle East) and so strongly favour the Arab world. Hence the development of a conflict which is now beginning to split Socialist movements. How far it will go we cannot say.

The Proper Role of Politicians

The first essential for correct action is to sweep away the modern totalitarian conception of government. This conception implies that individuals belong to governments whereas governments should belong to individuals. Members of parliament are the servants; most of them well paid, of the electors. Their primary purpose is to represent, and insist upon the implementation of their electors' policies inside a generally agreed Rule of Law.

There is a widespread myth, which governments like to foster, about the good governments do, or are going to do for the individual. All government is necessarily restrictive, and there is much truth in the saying that - "that nation is governed best which is governed least".

The famous English historian, Thomas Henry Buckle, provided a refreshing dash of realism when he wrote in 1867: - "No great political improvements, no great reform, either legislative or executive, has ever been originated in any country by its rulers. The first suggestions of such steps have been bold and able thinkers, who discern the abuse, denounce it, and point out how it can be remedied...At length, if circumstances are favourable, the pressure becomes so strong, that the government is obliged to give way; and, the reform being accomplished, the people are expected to admire the wisdom of their rulers by whom all this has been done.