REPUBLICANS DRAW THE BATTLE LINES
by David Thompson
The secret movement for an Australian republic came out into
the open last Sunday with the formal launching of the Australian
Republican Movement (A.R.M.) in Sydney, effectively drawing
the battle lines for the Constitutional future of Australia.
The gaggle of Fabians, Marxists, humanists and left wingers
in general who have announced their support for the A.R.M.
contain no surprises for us so far.
Leftwing author Thomas Keneally is President
of the movement, with Mrs. Franca Arena, A.L.P. Member of
the N.S.W. Legislative Council, Secretary. We have been aware
for some time that for over a year this movement has been
secretly recruiting prominent people for their names and finance
to launch the 10-year campaign for a republic. The formal
launching of this movement could ultimately prove a serious
mistake for the republicans. It now provides form, focus and
a timetable to what was hitherto only a nebulous type of leftwing
ratbaggery.
The coming campaign will undoubtedly
be one of the biggest in which the League has ever been involved.
Fewer movements are better equipped, and none better motivated
to defend 200 years of Australian constitutional government,
1,000 years of British constitutional experience and 2,000
years of Christian heritage. The republican group was about
to launch full-page press advertisements earlier this year,
but were baulked by the Gulf War. "They thought it would look
unpatriotic", remarked one of Australia's best-known executives
in confidence to an Age columnist last month. Of course
the passing of the heat of the Gulf War means nothing; it
is still unpatriotic!
Others supporting this movement include
former N.S.W. Premier, Neville Wran, authors Donald Horne
and David Williamson, and David Hill, Managing Director of
the A.B.C. Some of the names also appear on such bodies as
the Steering Committee for the M.F.P. (John Menadue, Whitlam's
head of the Prime Minister's Department), Ausflag, the "One-World-Or-None"
environmental propaganda campaign of 1989, and other like
bodies. Franca Arena, Blanche D'Apulget (writer) and Jenny
Kee (fashion designer) all sponsored "One-World-Or-None".
Others include: Ian Chappell (former cricket captain), Geraldine
Doogue and Mark Day (journalists), Malcolm Turnbull (lawyer
and merchant banker), Harry Seidler (architect), Faith Bandler
(writer), Bruce Petty (cartoonist) and Professor George Winterton
(author of "Monarchy to Republic: Australian Republican Government").
TIP OF AN UGLY ICEBERG
The launching of the republican movement follows debate at
the recent A.L.P. conference in Tasmania. Although it is quite
certain that the republican movement includes leading State
and Federal politicians, they are mainly smart enough to keep
their heads down for the present. They know that such a movement
will dramatically polarise the Australian electorate. The
A.R.M. is undoubtedly intended to take the "heat" off the
A.L.P. on this issue. The muted debate on John Dawkins' resolution
for a republic at the A.L.P. conference confirms the political
sensitivity of the issue. But the Dawkins' resolution should
be recorded and remembered: "This conference calls upon the
Government to embark upon a public education campaign, culminating
in a referendum, which would effect the constitutional reform
necessary to enable Australia to become an independent republic
on January 26th (Australia Day) 2001." At the April constitutional
conference in Sydney, Mr. Hawke declined to place a timetable
upon what he called the 'inevitable' move to republicanism.
The new movement provides the timetable, which coincides with
Dawkins' timetable, and must place much additional pressure
on the A.L.P.
INEVITABILITY OF GRADUALISM
A republic is described by Hawke, Dawkins, Keneally - even
Sir Roden Cutler (former N.S.W. Governor) - and many others
as "inevitable". This is to be vigorously resisted for the
psychological warfare that it is. Perhaps Sir Roden is a victim.
The greatest technical stumbling block to a republic is, of
course, the constitutional necessity for a referendum. This
will be preceded by one of the most intensive propaganda campaigns
ever seen in Australia. A republic is not inevitable unless
those proposing it are much better organised (and funded)
than those loyal to the Crown. The subversion of the Monarchy
has been a gradual process, and takes the classical Marxist
form of the "inevitability of gradualism". This inevitability'
is implicitly denied by Dawkins himself when he says: "The
'inevitability' of the Australian republic will not come to
pass without a concerted campaign of political education over
the next decade before the year 2001. The Government must
be asked to make a concerted effort to inform Australians
about what a republic will mean for Australia and its system
of government ...." If a republic is inevitable, why the propaganda?
Why squander taxpayers' money browbeating them into a position
that they do not support? Because it is the only way a republic
can be achieved. The propaganda campaign has already started
- "the" republic being referred to as though it already exists,
and merely awaits a rubber stamp by referendum.
CULTURAL AND SPIRITUAL ATTACK
This republican movement is not about better, more accountable
government. It is a takeover bid for Australia's spiritual
and cultural identity. Keneally tacitly admitted this last
Sunday, when he referred to the colonial past, and said: "We
came to feel we possessed both an inherent worthiness which
would ensure that other, our betters, would look after us,
and an inherent inferiority complex which convinced us we
were not worthy to manage ourselves, or speak with an independent
voice. Both these suspicions were delusions and both have
damaged us and have kept and will continue to keep us a stunted
nation. If we wish to be a genuine nation, we cannot indulge
for much longer our lust for dependence on others... Our future
obviously belongs in another part of the world (Asia Pacific)
with different people...."
Such pathetic insecurity cannot go unchallenged. It was Australians
who pioneered this country under harsh conditions, and Australians
who defended it in time of war. Certainly they were European
(specifically British) values and standards that underwrote
our development morally, but to deliberately denigrate and
deny such a heritage is a distinct sign of immaturity and
insecurity.
A nation is much more than a geographical entity ("a part
of Asia") - it exists in the context of time and culture.
The deliberately Christian origins and influence of the Monarchy
underscore this and are a primary reason why they are attacked
by the Fabians and humanists. It is not merely a traditional
form of government that must be defended (until something
demonstrably better offers itself) but the very identity of
the nation. It would be a bad mistake to assume that the republicans
want change for the sake of change. They have not even bothered
to argue that a republic would provide a better system of
government. Where is the evidence of this? No, this change
is a means to an end; to cut Australians off from their roots,
so as to more readily fit them into the emerging international
structure.
The regionalisation of the world (as with the European Community)
is proceeding, and it is proposed to fit Australia into the
developing United States of Asia as a formal regional sovereign
entity - a preparation for Lenin's world State. A nation cut
off from its identity, history, culture and traditions is
merely flotsam on the tide of history and could scarcely resist
the erosion of any remaining sovereignty into a regional power
bloc.
FLAG ALSO A TARGET
It is not only the Monarchy that has become a target. The
symbols of a rich political and spiritual heritage must be
swept away. God Save the Queen was swept away overnight by
Whitlam, but the flag has proved a much tougher target. It
is more popular than ever, and as a symbol provides a powerful
emotional rallying point for loyalists. This must be intelligently
exploited. The campaign to save the Union Jack on the Australian
flag must go into top gear.
LIBERAL TASK FORCE UNCONVINCING
The formation of a special task force to fight for the preservation
of the monarchy by the Liberal Party is most encouraging.
It would be uncharitable to suggest that the Coalition badly
feels the need for an electoral fillip if they propose to
carry the baggage of an electoral liability like the consumption
tax into the next election. But if the Liberals are serious,
they will need to sharpen their performance considerably to
be effective. John Howard's debate with Professor Winterton
on the A.B.C's. 7.30 Report a few weeks ago was apologetic
and unconvincing in support of the monarchy. The Liberals
will have to do much, much better than this, but should be
encouraged strongly.
THE CALL TO ARMS
Our message to supporters is simple.
Clear the decks for the next great battle - a battle that
can and must be won: a constitutional monarchy, or a humanist
republic. It is quite clear that any future republic would
reject the Christian origins of our heritage, and must be
essentially humanist. The churches must be challenged about
their position. The next 10 years will produce another generation
of Australians who will qualify in a referendum on a republic.
This generation is a prime target for republicans, naturally.
Every effort should be made to see that they glean some understanding
of our heritage, and the contribution of permanence and stability
provided by the Monarchical system. This may be difficult
in the present educational environment, but not impossible.
The best tool to begin this process that we have yet seen
is a new, brief, powerful cassette recording, The Voice
of the Australian Flag. Produced by a group of Queenslanders,
this brilliant tool is a most valuable service to loyal Australians
at this critical time. At a time when one of the fastest growing
movements in the Soviet Union is back to a monarchy, each
supporter is called upon to equip himself appropriately for
the campaign. This means securing essential resources. While
other material and strategy is developed specifically to meet
the challenge, the following are of immediate value: Freedom
Wears a Crown by John Farthing - the Australian edition
with an introduction by Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, $10.00. The
Voice of the Australian Flag cassette tape: $10.00 for
two copies (you will need a minimum of two).
|
In Brief
DID THEY DIE IN VAIN? from The Sunday
Age (Melbourne), July 7th
"I take issue with your editorial stance and with your premature
approach to a few graphic artists to sketch replacements for
the national flag. "A people so immature that it cannot accept
its own history as enshrined in its national flag - and surely
ours is the most beautiful national flag in the world - is
unlikely to build a confident future. "All our institutions
are derived from the British Isles. Freedom did not come to
us from continental Europe, nor will it come from Asia. Why
change the institutions, which have preserved that freedom
so successfully until the present? "One hundred thousand Australians
have died this century in defence of that freedom and of those
institutions. If they could speak now, would they really want
us to change the flag they died under? (N.J. Clark, Headmaster,
Mentone Grammar School, Melbourne, Vic., 3194)
MULTICULTURAL CREW SETS POPULATION'S
DIRECTION from The Australian, July 2nd, 1991
Efforts by Labor's John Dawkins, Liberal's Philip Ruddock,
and Treasury's Stephen Rimmer (The Australian, 25-26-27/6)
to dig up the long lost immigration debate are very welcome.
"One smelly little rort remains buried. A committee of seven
from the National Population Council has been charged with
drawing up Australia' population policy to the year 2030.
"Of the less than magnificent seven, three earn their daily
bread from promoting multiculturalism: Castles, Christoffanini
and Iredale. Two are rabid supporters of the paid consultants
to the ethnic lobby: Withers and Toyne. One sits on the fence:
Hugo. And only one opposes immigration: Birrell. "The committee's
discussion paper called Population Issues and Australia's
Future is 50,000 words long. Not once does the word STABLE
or the word STABILISE appear, not even as one extreme in the
range of options. "We might be a nation of big pineapples,
big bananas and big merinos. But only a nation of the big
cultural cringe could pay a five to one majority of foreign
agents to draft its future." (Zero-Population-Growth, Wollongong,
N. S .W.)
SCRUTINISE BAN, from The Australian,
July 2nd
"Congratulations to Neil Brown for highlighting the impact
of the Federal Government's 'broadcast ban' legislation (The
Australian, 27/6). "I should point out that the legislation
was 'guillotined' through the House of Representatives after
less than four hours of debate on May 30, and is due to be
debated in the Senate on August 13. The Coalition will strenuously
oppose the objectionable legislation, so it will need the
support of the Democrats in the Senate to become law. "Last
week the Democrats voted with the A.L.P. to prevent the proposal
from being examined by an all-party committee. If ever a piece
of legislation needed detailed scrutiny, it is this one -
yet the Democrats have refused a hearing to those thousands
of Australians who have objected to the Government's plans
to gag free speech." (Warwick Parer, Shadow Minister for Administrative
Services, Canberra)
ESCAPE CLAUSE, from The Australian,
July 2nd
"Mr. Neil Brown's analysis, Free Gifts or Free Speech
(The Australian, 27/6) had it right. The Political
Broadcasts and Political Donations Bill is tainted by some
curious clauses that crept in at the last moments of the debate
in the House. "Unfortunately, Mr. Brown did not look hard
enough at Clause 314AA(2), Mr. Kerin's amendment, which wrecks
the whole disclosure bit by allowing the Minister to exempt
sensitive donors, either persons or organisations, from having
their names disclosed." (Kevin McSweeney, Bateman's Bay, N.S.W.)
|
THATCHER THRILLS THE THRONG WITH THREATS
by Jeremy Lee
There is now open alarm among the 'one worlders' at Margaret
Thatcher's refusal to go away. The one thing they do NOT want
now, with Britain seemingly 'in the bag', is any public referral
to the matter of sovereignty and heritage. The Sydney Morning
Herald (June 29th) spelled out the implications for Britain:
"... As they stand, the draft treaties
on monetary and political union would dramatically change
life and government in the United Kingdom. In the grand scheme
of things, its pound sterling would be replaced by the euro
and most foreign policy would be conducted on its behalf from
Brussels; interest rates would be fixed by a European Central
Bank beyond the grasp of politicians, and government borrowings
would be dictated by rigid E.C. rules; crime would be fought
by a European equivalent of the F.B.I. and British soldiers
would be committed to a European Rapid Reaction Force.
Individually, Britons would be limited to no more than 48
hours work a week ... they would carry identity cards and
be identified first as Europeans on their passports; their
favourite tobacco and spirits would no longer be advertised
and their children would be schooled according to Europe wide
standards ... They would pay a European tax direct to Brussels..."
A feature article in the Financial
Review (July 1st) pointed out that President Bush is stepping
up efforts to create a new trading bloc to include both Mexico
and Canada: "... In addition to Mexico, President Bush is
proposing to extend the existing U.S.-Canadian free-trade
zone to include Latin-American countries... The article went
on:
"... Besides moving swiftly towards
the creation of a more cohesive European identity through
political union and greater economic and monetary union, the
European Community is negotiating to extend its trading power
to cover virtually all the countries of Europe at present
not part of the E.C. It is also considering trading links
with the emerging new democracies of central Europe ... The
'Grand Design' for a Brussels controlled Europe, in its concluding
stages with only 18 months to go until the new European flag
(blue with a gold circle of stars) takes precedence over the
Union Jack, does NOT NEED a high-profile former Prime Minister,
never defeated at the polls, talking about national sovereignty.
The Guardian Weekly (July 1st) devoted a series of
articles to the "Thatcher reaction". Although the paper attempts
to portray her as kicking against the pricks of inevitability,
there is a faintly anxious air implicit in its own articles.
The Conservative Party, once adamantly pro-European, is now
deeply divided. The Labour Party, once briefly anti-European,
is now eulogistic about Brussels. Edward Heath, another ex-P.M.,
in a venomous and vitriolic speech, has challenged Mrs. Thatcher
to speak in the House of Commons on the issue, where he can
get at her. But her audience is now the general public, both
at home and abroad - an audience that is swamping her with
invitations.
A letter to The Guardian by W.H. Cousins, Founder of
the European Federal Union Movement in 1957, shows the philosophy
of the 'one worlders': The force of mankind's economic
and political evolution is now inexorable. No small country
will be able to opt out for long. A united Europe is inevitable,
with or without the U.K., or Mrs. Thatcher's agreement ...
She appears to be ignorant of mankind's economic and political
evolution. Darwin and Wallace dealt only with man's natural
development. To date the thread of his political evolution
can be clearly traced through family, city, state, petty kingdom
and nation. The next step is obvious
One can only ask,
who is the political equivalent of Darwin's natural theory?
Lenin? Marx? Montague Norman? George Bush? Or are they themselves
merely the 'catspaws' for the money power?
THE NEW MOVE FOR A REPUBLIC
Shortly before the "republican" resolution at the A.L.P's.
Hobart Conference; The Age reported the uniting of
100 prominent Australian business and political figures in
a new campaign for a republic Australia. The Hobart resolution
was no 'knee jerk' reaction from a squabbling and discredited
political party droning its swansong. The 1982 A.L.P. Platform,
Constitution and Rules included the following (page 2): "Reform
of the Australian Constitution and other political institutions
to ensure they reflect the will of the majority of Australian
citizens and the existence of Australia as an independent
republic."
The Sydney Morning Herald (June 29th, 1991) reported:
"We are about to witness the formation of the Australian Republican
Movement to promote the idea that Australia becomes a republic
as soon as possible. Author Thomas Keneally is founding president
and among other prominent persons involved are former modern
day Medici, Franco Belgiorno-Nattis, banker Malcolm Turnbull
and former N.S.W. Premier Neville Wran, who says he wants
to stay in the background. "This is not a political issue,"
he told me yesterday. "There are a great many people of all
political persuasions who support the idea." - Which makes
the widespread distribution of the inspiring cassette tape
"The Voice of The Australian Flag" all the more important.
|