THE PASSING OF A SOCIALIST ENIGMA

by Jeremy Lee
Among the glittering array of world-famous figures stopping off in a heavily-guarded Canberra in recent days, the passing of a well-known former federal politician gained a few sub-headings. Former deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer Jim Cairns was, by today's standards, an old-style Labor politician, although seen as a radical in his day. Among tributes paid at his funeral, former cabinet colleagues Tom Uren and Clyde Cameron paid tribute to him.
(Clyde Cameron, surprisingly, since his hostility to the League of Rights, gave a public endorsement for Jeremy Lee's book "What Will We Tell Our Children").
Cairns is remembered chiefly for his leadership of the anti-Vietnam war protests, which were instrumental in the subsequent withdrawal of Australian troops during Whitlam's period in office.

Cairns, a one-time policeman and academic, was a socialist; but he was also opposed to foreign ownership in Australia - a far cry from modern Labor Party figures, who are mere sinecures for the free-market globalism also espoused by the Coalition. In the book he wrote prior to Labor's victory in 1972, Jim Cairns analysed the Capitalist-Communist dichotomy of the Cold War that dominated so much of the post-World War II era. Although strongly opposed to monopoly capitalism, he acknowledged the evils of Communism, and preferred the gradualistic approach of the Fabians, also advocated by the Marxist theoritician Grammschi. Hence the title of his book The Quiet Revolution.

In his book Oil On Troubled Waters, published in 1976 after had had left office and Malcolm Fraser had succeeded Gough Whitlam, Dr Cairns had modified his views greatly, and was leaning more and more to the belief that the money question was the biggest issue to be faced by all classes of society. He included a lucid and detailed chapter headed 'Where Does the Money Come From?' -a detailed and accurate description of the money-creation process. He showed how bank loans create deposits, being a fresh creation which added to the nation's money supply.

His conclusion went on: "… Not only have the banks power to create money within wide limits, but they do so. As well as determining the total volume of money, the banks decide also to whom they will lend. It is obvious they will prefer rich and powerful people and the companies associated with them; they will prefer 'old customers', and they will not be too keen to lend to poorer people, to 'battlers', or to persons or even companies who may be competitive to their associates. The power to create money and to decide who should get it is a vast and significant social and economic power and for this reason, the Labor movement has always believed it should not be a privately-owned power but be exercised solely by a public or peoples' bank …."

It is hard to believe this was written by a man in the same party as Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, who sold to private interests the peoples' bank (the Commonwealth Bank) which the Labor Party had created shortly after Federation. Dr Cairns had moved a long way.

Later in the same Chapter he wrote: "There are three main sources of funds for government expenditure. The first is taxation, the second is private borrowing from banks and other institutions, and the general public, and the third borrowing is from the central or Reserve Banks. For many years now the not un-influential Douglas credit advocates have campaigned for the use of national or central bank credit especially for payments or subsidies to consumers in the belief that insufficient demand is never (sic) distributed through production to buy all that is produced and an advantage of a subsidy to consumers is that it does not increase costs of production. Although there is much validity in this view, it has always been rejected by orthodox economists. Keynes, however, did give some recognition to Major Douglas, who originated the theory of Douglas credit. Consumers have been substantially and increasingly subsidized in Australia, for that is exactly what pensions, child endowment and other cash benefits are, although not of course the kind of subsidy Douglas advocated . The central or Reserve Bank has been little used as a source of funds for this or any other purpose …."

In a private conversation the late Viv Guy, a prominent Melbourne businessman, asked Dr Cairns whether he would favour the introduction of debt-free money in Australia. Viv Guy narrated Jim Cairns' reply. 'Yes, he would favour such a step - provided the money went to government, rather than be paid to individuals as a dividend.'

Giving freedom to each individual in society rather than increasing the scope of government was a last step away from Marxism or monopoly Capitalism that Dr Jim Cairns could not contemplate. Nevertheless, he had come a long way, and was a class above his modern Labor counterparts.
(Oil On Troubled Waters, Jim Cairns, Widescope International Publishers Pty Ltd. 1976)

THE LAST DEATH-RATTLES OF FULL EMPLOYMENT

There has been a number of statements and articles recently concerning the much-vaunted 'recovery' in the US. Economists are mystified by the fact that unemployment has not gone down. It is now referred to as the 'jobless recovery'. The pundits claim it goes against everything they've experienced before, and they are mystified. If they'd merely turn to the writings of C.H. Douglas, published eighty years ago, entitled "The Breakdown of the Employment System" they might be enlightened.

The current picture is well illustrated in a recent article from The Wall Street Journal, reprinted in The Weekend Financial Review, (25-26/10/03) which gave this picture: "The US manufacturing sector has gone through 38 gruelling months of declining employment, but a new report shows factory job-losses aren't just an American problem. From Brazil to Russia, yes, even to China, manufacturing jobs are disappearing round the globe. Economists at Alliance Capital Management in New York looked at employment trends in 20 large economies and found that from 1995 to 2002 more than 23 million jobs in the manufacturing sector were eliminated, a decline of more than 11 per cent.

Contrary to conventional US beliefs, the research found American manufacturing workers weren't the biggest losers. The US lost about 2 million manufacturing jobs in the 1995-2002 period, an 11 per cent drop. But Brazil had a 20 per cent decline, Japan's factory work force shed 16 per cent of its jobs, while China's was down 15 per cent.

Joseph Carson, director of global economic research at Alliance, says the reasons for the declines are similar across the globe. Gains in technology and competitive pressure have forced factories to become more efficient, allowing them to boost output with far fewer workers. Even as manufacturing employment declined, says Carson, global industrial output rose more than 30 per cent.
At the same time, countries everywhere - including developing countries like China - are struggling to reduce excess capacity. "We've got too many steel plants in the world, too many auto companies," says Bill Belchere, chief economist for Asia at JP Morgan Chase in Hong Kong…."

The article pointed out that the employment crisis in manufacturing had followed in the footsteps of agriculture.: "From 1910 to 1990, agricultural employment in the US fell to 2.5 per cent of total employment from 32 per cent; in Britain it fell to 2 per cent from 11 per cent, and in Germany it fell to 3 per cent from 34 per cent, according to statistics provided by Douglas Irwin, a Dartmouth-based economic historian …."

The Social Credit movement has been pointing to this state of affairs for many years. But conventional political movements from left to right have held the common view that full employment is a "given absolute" for every economy. Yet in the tragic personal disasters of 'down-sized' workers across the world, staring at over-production everywhere, lie the seeds of a different kind of world - where it is not necessary for all to work in order to produce everything that the world needs.

"Well, how are people going to get money to live?" goes the conventional question. Dr Jim Cairns was agreeable to the creation of debt-free money for the government to devise ways of employing everyone. "Make-work schemes" would be an essential part of government policy, however useless and detrimental such work might be.

The Social Credit proposal, on the other hand, is to supplement earnings with a National Dividend, paid to every man, woman and child, as part of the inheritance that the technological era has given them. This would provide individuals with a whole range of choices currently unavailable. The mad rush of whole populations going through the rituals of morning and evening rush hours would become unnecessary. Families, communities and, above all, children, would become more important than jobs. Despair and death would retreat before Life more abundant.

The situation so well described in The Wall Street Journal article was heralded in 1995 in the State-of-the-World Forum, held in San Francisco under the chairmanship of former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, in which it was agreed by the many world figures attending that all the world's needs in the coming century could be produced by no more than 20 per cent of the workforce. That situation is upon us. Unless there are changes to the way incomes are distributed, from an employment wage to a national dividend, the promise of a creative world will be dashed to pieces round our ears.

THE REAL AGENDA

by Betty Luks
"'Smithgate' could bring down the monarchy" was the heading of an article in The Scotsman, 28th October 2003 by journalist Anthony Holden, and republished in Neil Baird's on-line newsletter. Holding the office of Constitutional Monarchy in high regard, plus having great respect for our present Queen Elizabeth II and believing Constitutional Monarchy with its separation and division of powers fundamentally important to our own national well-being, I thought this was a matter to be looked into.

What are the allegations? According to Mr. Holden: "The 'smoking gun' worth so much money is the tape Diana kept inside an antique box with her other most prized possessions… (it was) Diana's recording of her interview with a former Royal valet, George Smith, the victim of an alleged gay rape by another Royal servant." Mr. Holden tells his readers, "Mr Smith was subsequently paid off by Prince Charles to the tune of three times his annual salary, as confirmed in the recent report by his private secretary, Sir Michael Peat…On the tape, Mr Smith reportedly gives chapter and verse on another allegation already in the public domain: that he had witnessed a Royal in a compromising act with a member of staff. Those in the know about Mr Smith's allegations… believe the monarchy could not survive their publication…They cannot be printed, for obvious legal reasons, unless Mr Smith himself chooses to make them public. Or someone publishes the tape."
What! Is this man serious? Are the allegations that the sexual behaviour of one member of the Royal family is so earth shattering that it threatens the whole structure of the Constitutional Monarchy?

Before we try to pull the alleged splinter out of the eye of the alleged Royal Family member, let's see if we can't first get the log out of our own! Take a good hard look at the standard of personal behaviour we now find acceptable, as it is portrayed back to us in just about any TV soapy on any night of the week. And Anthony Holden, part of the same media who feeds us the poison, the rubbish, is calling for the down-fall of the Constitutional Monarchy because of one person's alleged personal behaviour! Think very carefully about this. If the allegation turns out to be true, does this mean we are going to allow the whole edifice of our Constitutional Monarchy to be pulled down (and the not-so-hidden intention is to replace it with a socialist soviet-style republic) because one member of the Royal Family exhibited the behaviour of an alley cat?

Henry VIII, although a notorious womanizer, didn't 'bring down the monarchy', didn't cause the people to pull down the basic structures of their own nation. He did far more harm in other ways, but that is another story. What is obvious about Mr. B., the Princess's former butler? He is busy selling his loyalty and his own integrity for money. He might gain a very tidy financial sum, but he is selling his own soul in the bargain.

What is the real purpose behind the article? Anthony Holden pinpoints it himself: "The real point, as Burrell's book is published worldwide, is that he…(has)…the power to bring down the monarchy." Now, why would an ordinary money-hungry, grubby little butler want to bring down the Monarchy? Maybe he wouldn't want to, but there are powerful forces who do -- and it would suit their purposes to use one such as Mr. Burrel.

As for the allegations that Princess Diana was murdered, we are not privy to the police evidence and like Mr. Holden must await the outcomes of at least two lawsuits for further information. One trial will be held in Scotland, "brought in Scotland by Dodi Fayed's father, Mohamed, and the other in Paris by the parents of the driver who died in the crash, Henri Paul…. Mr Paul's parents are challenging the charge their son was drunk, alleging that his blood sample was falsified."

THE GREAT HUMAN FREEDOMS

When will Australians wake up to the fact their freedoms: to think, to speak, to choose, to be ambitious, to be independent, to be industrious, etc., have long been usurped?

Pauline Hanson - political prisoner
The Australian Freedom Foundation's November 2003 newsletter gives an update of the prison treatment being meted out to Pauline Hanson. Now Pauline is not in the same league as Rene Rivkin, she doesn't have the right contacts, so she is still in prison. Neither is she in the same league as the Allan Bonds of this world. While he has 'done his time' the 'establishment' soon welcomed him back. That doesn't happen to too many who have served time in our nation's prisons.

According to Sydney talk-back host Alan Jones, Pauline is being treated like a common criminal by the Queensland prison authorities. Placed in a maximum security prison, she sleeps on a thin rubber mattress stretched across a concrete slab and before and after attending a doctor's clinic, while handcuffed, she is subjected to strip-searches . As are family members and friends before visiting Pauline.

According to the AFF writer, Pauline is being used as an example of what others can expect should they contemplate challenging the New World Order internationalist agenda of the major political parties.

Editor's note
Our 'friends' are experts on the human psyche and the 'mob' mentality. They know how to manipulate the two most basic emotions, fear and desire for their own purposes.

Another political prisoner is Ernst Zundel
Mark Weber of the Institute of Historical Review (IHR) sent a report on Ernst
For more than six months now, Ernst Zundel has been held without charge in solitary confinement in Canada on the pretext that he is a threat to national security. In fact, this 64-year-old German-born writer, publisher and civil rights activist is a political prisoner and a victim of great injustice. There is absolutely no basis for the "security threat" charge. Zundel's life is an open book. He is a peaceful man with no record of violence. During the 40 years he lived in Canada, he was never convicted of a crime. In fact, he has himself been a victim of hate and violence. He survived at least three attempts on his life, including a devastating arson attack against his residence.
Jewish groups are demanding that Zundel be deported to Germany, where he faces years of imprisonment for the "thought crime" of "denying the Holocaust." ("Holocaust denial" is against the law in Germany, France, Switzerland and some other European countries.)

Zundel is in prison not because his views are unpopular, or because he's a "security risk." He's in prison because Jewish groups want him there. He's a prisoner because he promotes views that the Jewish-Zionist lobby considers harmful to its interests. This lobby is the decisive, critical factor in the decades-old campaign to silence him. The only sustained and institutionalized effort to imprison him has come from this lobby, which includes the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association, and the League for Human Rights of B'nai B'rith (with the Anti-Defamation League, its counterpart in the US).

Veteran investigative journalist speaks out for Zundel
A few prominent Canadians have been speaking out against the unjust treatment of Ernst Zundel. One such person is Bill Dunphy, a veteran investigative journalist and editor for the daily Hamilton Spectator. He spent six years probing Canada's "white supremacist" movement, and got to know Zundel personally. Although he has no sympathy for Zundel's views, in a hard-hitting column (Hamilton Spectator, May 14) he told readers: "Our government has seized and branded Ernst Zundel, stripped him of his human rights, tried him in secret and found him wanting, and will now hand him over to a foreign government anxious to throw him in jail... Zundel - who did this country a favour by wiping off the books our disgraceful False News laws - has never once been convicted of a criminal offence in this country, never once found to have violated the hate crime laws that rest snugly around the throat of free expression in this country.
Calculating correctly that there was no political cost, no 'down side' to slipping on the jackboots to kick a reviled old man out of our country, our government cobbled together their best insults and innuendo, and Lord knows what secret 'evidence,' and branded Ernst Zundel a threat to national security."

ANOTHER 'NEO-CONSERVATIVE' IN POWERFUL POSITION

The Asia Times' Washington correspondent Jim Lobe (30/10/03) reports the neo-conservative strategist David Wurmser has been 'quietly' appointed as a Middle East adviser to U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney. According to Jim Lobe, David Wurmser is on record as having long called for "the United States and Israel to work together to 'roll back' the Ba'ath-led government in Syria."

"Wurmser", wrote Lobe, "joined Cheney's staff under its powerful national security director, I Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in mid-September, according to Cheney's office. The move is significant, not only because Cheney is seen increasingly as the dominant foreign policy influence on President George W Bush, but also because it adds to the notion that neo-conservatives remain a formidable force under Bush, despite the sharp plunge in public confidence in Bush's handling of post-war Iraq resulting from the faulty assumptions propagated by the neo-cons before the war."

Mr. Wurmser enjoys favoured protégé status of arch-hawk and former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and according to Jim Lobe "the appointment speaks loudly to Middle East specialists, who note Perle's long-time close association with Cheney, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld's chief deputy Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz was the first senior administration official to suggest that Washington might take action against Syria amid reports in April that Damascus was sheltering senior Iraqi leaders and weapons of mass destruction in the wake of the US invasion."
(Pentagon official Wolfowitz may not be feeling quite so cocky after fleeing a rocket attack on the heavily guarded Baghdad hotel in which he was staying. The attack was followed next day by car-bomb attacks on Baghdad police stations and the headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross.)
The fact that the U.S. House of Representatives' has approved a bill that would impose new economic and diplomatic sanctions against Syria is also noted.

Another neo-conservative, Richard Perle of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) was recently in Israel receiving a special award from the "Jerusalem Summit", an international group of right wing Jews and Christian Zionists who describe themselves as defenders of "civilization" against "Islamic fundamentalism", has made no secret of his own desire to confront Damascus. Of course the gentleman in question does not mean him personally confronting 'Damascus'. He means using the mighty fire-power of the United State military and sending young American service men and women to do his fighting for him.
In a series of interviews, Perle has applauded Israel's attack on Syrian territory - the first since 1967 - in alleged retaliation for a Palestinian suicide bombing in Israel and hoped it would be but one of many.

OF RIGHT-WING JEWS AND CHRISTIAN-ZIONISTS

by Betty Luks
The views of the international group "The Jerusalem Summit," would appear to be similar to some fundamentalist groups in Australia. They note with approval the deadly sacrifice paid by the cream of our youth, those fine young Australians (and British), in the 1917 'liberation' of Jerusalem from Turkish (Muslim) dominance; which thus made possible the cruel imposition of an interloping (Jewish) people, mainly of Eastern-European background, on 'the holy land'. The reason given then is the same as we are being force-fed today, it is to defend "civilisation" against "Islamic fundamentalism"!

Australians, through their Anzac Day services genuinely honour their brave young men and women. But as to the question of why each war was waged and who or what were the forces directing it behind the scenes, is quite another matter. The facts are slowly coming to the light of day from behind the subterfuge. Gullible Christians are being force-fed a romanticised version of modern history in order to gain their acceptance for what is being done in Christ's name. These people should ponder on the claims that these things are approved of, and done in the name (power) of their God.

There appears to be something in the psyche of these people which worships suffering for its own sake, and this something is not very far from a desire to inflict suffering. The idea of killing is presented under its most attractive form - that of sacrificial, idealistic killing. Let those gullible Christian-Zionists ponder on their claims of a God who would sacrifice others (including the people of the Middle East) for the advantage of a 'chosen people,' no matter the right or wrong of the claim, to that of the New Testament record of the love of our Creator which required Him to give Himself for our salvation.

If the ultimate reality of Love (God is Love) in their set of beliefs requires the sacrifice of someone else, anyone else, for His purposes for mankind, then those beliefs are quite a different set of beliefs to Christianity.

ANNUAL BASIC FUND LAUNCHED

A 'MUST' READ

WANTED FOR ON TARGET WEBSITE ARCHIVES

Our webmaster reports he is missing On Target Vol.6. No.46 27th November 1970 and Vol.10. No 47, 29th November 1974 from his files. Does any older League supporter have a copy of these missing issues? If so, please send a photocopy to: Webmaster, Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27, Happy Valley, South Australia 5159

"THE NEW DAY" DINNER & SEMINAR - ALBURY

TWO NEW BOOKS LAUNCHED AT LEAGUE SEMINAR

"The Moral Implications of Centralised Power" by Eric D. Butler
What a pleasure it was to launch Eric Butler's booklet at the National Seminar. Anthony Cooney graciously wrote an Introduction to the work, in which he outlines the different schools of history, the underlying philosophy of each and their impact upon people's thinking. Two spring to mind, the Progessive School of Marxism and the Cyclical Theory of Oswald Spengler. Mr. Cooney then refers his readers to C. H. Douglas' opposing view with his dictum: "History is the Crystalisation of Politics". Eric Butler used the Bismarkian Reich and its socialist-welfare-state policies and the destructive and corrupting effects of centralised power, not only on those who possess it but equally upon those who suffer it. The remedy, he tells us, is not to try to defeat power with power - to cast out Beelzebub by Beelzebub - but by individual creative initiative, balanced by personal responsibilities. He insists: the essence of freedom is freedom of choice - which we must exercise or lose.

"Social Credit - Aspects" by Anthony Cooney
In this little gem, Cooney gently and patiently guides his readers to the revelation Social Credit is not merely a collection of economic and political theories, but a viewpoint from which we should judge the world and the events about us. In one example, he brilliantly contrasts novelist Ayn Rand's "Ethical Egotism" with Shakespeare's portrayal of "The Bonds of Nature" through his characters in King Lear. Anthony Cooney is a born teacher and this addition to his social credit series is already a winner.