THE DISINTEGRATING 'NEW WORLD ORDER'

by Eric D. Butler
While still talking eloquently about their vision of a "New World Order", propagandists for the vision are finding it increasingly difficult to keep pace with unfolding realities. Whatever one thinks of the French decision to conduct what they claim will be their final tests on their nuclear weapons programme, as a member of the European Economic Community, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (N.A.T.O.) and the G-7 Nations, which met last weekend in Nova Scotia, Canada, one cannot dispute that the French have made it clear that they are primarily concerned with French independence.

The French referendum concerning the European Economic Community was only carried with a small majority. It is difficult to see anywhere evidence that the grandiose plans to create a "New World Order" are being hailed with enthusiasm. While the policy makers of the U.S.A. were able to use the United Nations, bribing several nations like Egypt, Syria and even Communist China, as a cover to use its technological superiority to bring Saddam Hussein of Iraq to heel, it was forced to accept an ignominious retreat from Somalia in East Africa. Yugoslavia has provided the pathetic spectacle of United Nations "peace keeping" forces being taken hostages by one of the warring parties. The American Congress continues to display a marked reluctance to the concept of having American troops used in any ground fighting in Yugoslavia.

There is a growing isolationist mood in the U.S.A., a development that concerns the internationalists. The central feature of the world scene is that every move towards centralisation and internationalism results in violent reaction. The former Soviet Union provides graphic evidence of this fact. In spite of his backing by the internationalists dominating the Clinton regime in the U.S.A., Boris Yeltsin of Russia is finding it increasingly difficult to handle ethnic groups who want to run their own affairs.
While Nelson Mandela of South Africa has been anointed by the devotees of a New World Order including a unitary State of South Africa, Zulu leader Chief Buthelezi is making increasing demands for greater autonomy for the Zulu people. Right throughout Africa the realities of tribalism act as a major buffer against the internationalist programme.

It is now approximately 50 years ago that the internationalists, the most prominent among these being Marxists of one kind or another, set up at the Bretton Woods conference two major instruments for furthering the internationalist dream of a "New World Order", the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. While providing lucrative life styles for tens of thousands of international bureaucrats, both these international institutions have only contributed to the world's disasters.

The General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (G.A.T.T.) was also to have contributed to the creation of the New World Order. But the ongoing dispute between Japan and the U.S.A. concerning trade has demonstrated that, like the French with nuclear testing, in the last resort no nation is going to surrender its sovereignty when it becomes clear that this surrender is going to produce a violent reaction.

It was the wise and witty Christian writer G.K. Chesterton who observed that the plight of the world was the great hope for the world. The plight of the world demonstrated that natural law truths were being violated; that there were absolutes. When man displayed enough humility to accept that there were natural law absolutes, there was a way out of his problems: he could return to an acceptance of natural law and absolutes. The New World Order violates such concepts and must therefore be rejected.

ZIONIST CAMPAIGN AGAINST GRAEME CAMPBELL

The brazen effrontery of Zionist Jewish leaders has been demonstrated by the attempt by Mr. Isi Leibler to "discipline" West Australian Labor M.P. Graeme Campbell. The Australian Jewish News of June 16th reports, "A.L.P. sources told the Australian Jewish News this week the federal executive had wide powers and could withdraw Mr. Campbell's endorsement as the candidate or throw him out of the Party, or both".

Mr. Isi Leibler has written to Prime Minister Keating calling for the Labor Party to apply "maximum disciplinary measures" against Campbell. Leibler said that Campbell's continuing association with the odious racist group, the Australian League of Rights, was not in the interests of the A.L.P. or the development "of a tolerant" and more "decent Australia". The Leibler tolerance does not extend to a Member of Parliament deciding which group he can or cannot speak to when requested.

The Leibler intolerance is not in the best interests of the rank and file of the Jewish people, many of whom have little time for the Leiblers of the Jewish community. While on the subject of "tolerance", it is an ominous sign of the times that in Toronto, Canada, Ernst Zundel has had his home and office firebombed, with some $500,000 worth of damage. Even more disturbing is that a number of Zionist Jewish spokesmen in Canada have welcomed the attack on Zundel.

RESISTING AMALGAMATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA

by David Thompson
The Fabian determination to eliminate the States, supported by the likes of Prime Minister Keating, exists because the States could be the instruments for decentralising power. First, if the role of the Senate, as a States' house of review was restored, Mr. Keating and Mr. Willis would have much more to complain about than the Democrats' determination to knock out the building wholesale tax on kitchens. And second, the sheer diversity of government often throws up unexpected barriers to the centralisation of power. For example, the centralists are horrified to find that in South Australia the wretched ratepayers actually have some say in whether their councils are amalgamated, or not!

This unusual state of affairs is now unique to South Australia, but could slow down the entire programme of regionalisation if properly utilised. The procedure appears quite complex, but the principle is simple: the 'experts' offer a recommendation on the wisdom of changing council boundaries, and if they wish to do so, ratepayers veto it. In practice, either ratepayers or councils can initiate boundary alterations or council amalgamations, and lodge a proposal with the Local Government Association in S.A.

RATEPAYERS' POLL

The L.G.A. arranges the formation of a panel consisting of a State elected representative, a local government representative, a financial expert, a representative from the Local Government Union and a delegate from each affected council. In the case of a ratepayer initiated proposal, the ratepayers nominate a representative. The public is then consulted about proposed changes, and a recommendation is made by the panel. If any representative expresses complete disagreement with the rest of the panel, no proposal can be adopted without binding support achieved in a poll. A poll is also held if the panel receives a petition from 10 percent or more of ratepayers.

In the case of a poll being forced, ratepayers in each affected council area must be offered a summary of the arguments for and against the changes. The councils are responsible for the polls, and if 25 percent or more of ratepayers vote, the results are binding. If less than 25 percent of ratepayers vote, the poll is not binding. Queenslanders or Victorians might compare the South Australian process with their own process of "consultation" in local government amalgamation matters. Any comparison quickly reveals that the S.A. system is the only representative and fair system. Which, of course, is why the Fabians are trying to have the S.A. system knocked out!

ASSAULT ON THE FAMILY CONTINUES

Last week the National Child Protection Council (whoever they are) produced a report in N.S.W. in which they call for legislation to outlaw the physical punishment of children either at school or at home, because such punishment is a 'breach of human rights, and caused aggression and amorality in adults'.

As we depart further from the traditional common law, and further embrace the humanist United Nations conventions (like the Convention on the Rights of the Child) we can expect a continuing escalation of such madness. Ultimately it is a spiritual or philosophical force directed against the remaining shreds of the Christian society, and the family in particular.

The Sydney broadcaster and talkback host, Alan Jones, raises some telling points in his Sunday Telegraph column on the issue. Jones comments: "Increasingly it appears as though the progressive erosion of moral, ethical and religious beliefs and the blatant disregard for the orthodox family are distorting what were once clear social bearings ... (Children) need to be taught self-discipline, by means of external discipline, before they can share the freedom of adults."

Jones refers to the work of a pair of (apparently nearly insane) academics, U.S. "child libertarians", John Holt and Richard Farson. Needless to say, Holt and Farson are psychologists, and Holt claims that children should even have the right to vote. Of course, they do now, from the age of 18 in Australia, but Holt goes further: "I am not just talking about the 16-year-old vote, but the six-year-old vote," he said. There is no indication of why Holt regards the six-year-old vote as being any better informed than the three-year-old voter! Holt also wants to scrap child labor laws, and grant children of all ages the right to work, own property and travel independently. Someone asked what about lost children, to which he replied, "Yes, they might. Adults get lost right now. It may be a nuisance, but not a tragedy or disaster."

His colleague, Richard Farson, is just as nutty, saying that children should have the right to live where and with whom they like, even in homes run by other children. He thinks they should be able to choose their education (if any) and set the curriculum, and advocates sexual freedom, as in Sweden.
A U.S. scholar, William Donohue of Washington's Heritage Foundation, pointed out that in Sweden, child libertarianism means that while it is illegal for a girl's father to slap her, it is quite legal for him to have sex with her! This sort of lunacy would be comical, except this is where we are headed in Australia.

It is significant that while the N.S.W. Minister for Family Services, Rosemary Crowley, did not endorse the Child Protection Council report, neither did she dismiss it as the dangerous junk it so obviously is. It will not be long before the femocrats in her Department begin to adopt an agenda that closely resembles this report, and families begin to feel the lash of this Department.

It should be remembered that it was this Department, along with its equivalent in Victoria, which kidnapped dozens of children of The Family in simultaneous dawn raids in N.S.W. and Victoria, only to have the cases hurled out of the courts eventually. But not before a great deal of pain and damage was inflicted on the victims.

It should be noted that the new Leader of the N.S.W. Liberal Party, Mr. Collins, is apparently quite content for the status of the family to be undermined. In his first address to the Liberal Party State Council last month, Mr. Collins offended some members by calling on the Liberals to accept same sex partners as legitimate relationships. Only one member of the State executive remarked that the majority of delegates "thought the statement obscene."

CAUSE AND EFFECT

ECONOMY IN DECLINE

BOB CARR (NOW) PREMIER OF NEW SOUTH WALES

USE COMMON SENSE ON IMMIGRATION