DEALING WITH STUDENT VIOLENCE

"The Returned Servicemen's League and the Democratic Labor Party have called for Government aid to be withdrawn from such students" - The Age, Melbourne, July 8.

Events in both Sydney and Melbourne last week indicate that demonstrations are now moving into the pre-determined sphere of violence, in line with Communist strategy. The so-called "non-violent" agitators are being supplanted by hard-core specialists trained to promote violence, not mere demonstration. There is no doubt that the great mass of Australians is sick to death of Student demonstrations and the weakness of University authorities in dealing with them.
Few Australians realise, however, that the policy of their Government, along with U.S.A. and those western nations, which give lip service to the no-win policy in Vietnam, and policies of co-existence with Communism, has set the stage for the violence we are now witnessing.
The hard-core Communist revolutionaries are only exploiting the situation created by policies of weakness and compromise.
However the immediate problem of riots and violence has to be dealt with now.

The disease of Communist brainwashing being a long-term problem in the present context. The immediate problem is to maintain law and order, and to sheet home to those responsible the results of their actions. Therefore the suggestions made above are important, and judging by the screams coming from the left-wing politicians, the student leaders, and the ineffectual administrators of Universities, they realise such measures would be effective.

Government action needs to go much further to curb the suppurating cancer. The irresponsible use of public funds to finance student newspapers should cease. These should stand on the support given them by students, and not be subsidised by the taxpayer. Students convicted of making a public nuisance, or of being implicated in violence should be expelled for a lengthy period from the University. Staff of student newspapers, and membership of student bodies should be restricted to students who are engaged in full-time studies, and who have a successful yearly academic record. Finally, and most important, scholarships awarded to university students, should be paid direct to parents of students, the parents would then have the means of disciplining their children.
There is no doubt that the irresponsible use of taxpayers' funds has done much to foment rebellion against the authority and discipline of family life.

All the above does not touch the problem of dealing with the poisonous effects resulting from the indoctrination of students by tutors, lecturers and professors, who have rejected Christian morality and freedom as the basis of truth. Such reforms will have to come from the grass toots of our society. Without it we perish.

THE CONSITUTIONAL STRUGGLE IN RHODESIA

". . the Prime Minister, Mr. Smith, sacked his tough Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr. Harper." - The Australian, July 8.

The world press is indulging in a great deal of speculation as to the possibility of internal dissension in the Rhodesian parliament. They are clutching at straws. Mr. Harper may disagree with Mr. Smith over the design of the proposed new constitution, and feel sufficiently strongly about it to offer his resignation; but there is no doubt that where either Mr. Smith, Mr. Harper or any other Rhodesian stands on the central issue of Rhodesia's stand against the tyranny being organised from America, Britain and the U.N. with help from ourselves.

Mr. Smith made it clear during the debate in the Parliament his clear understanding of the situation. He said the Government had believed for a long time that Mr. Wilson did not want a solution with Rhodesia. Mr. Wilson had rejected the advice of Dr. Banda and the African Rhodesian M.P's who had called for a resumption of negotiations. Mr. Smith also made it clear that it was well understood in Rhodesia that Mr. Wilson was not concerned with the interests of Africans, but was obsessed with a solution, which would suit the Communists.

If Members of the Australian Government have not realised this truth by now it is time they did, and reversed their present policy towards Rhodesia, which only gives comfort to the revolutionary forces in the world.

THE BIAFRAN SLAUGHTER

"The Queen was asked yesterday to intercede with the Nigerian Federal Government in an effort to stop it from carrying out its threat to shoot down planes carrying relief supplies to Biafra" - The Age, Melbourne, July 8.

The truth of what Mr. Ian Smith was saying above in regard to Mr. Wilson is no more clearly illustrated than in the shameful record of the British-Soviet partnership to supply the arms, which are slaughtering the Christian Ibo's in the seccessionist state of Biafra.

Peter Smark in The Australian, July 5 quoted an African diplomat in London who said, "The policy of the Nigerian, British and Soviet Governments towards Biafra is very clear now. It might be described as the buffalo concept - using the same policy of solution by extinction that the buffalo hunters used in the United States."

What we are seeing in Biafra is the logical culmination of Socialist philosophy in dealing with a situation where people decline to go along in the direction dictated by the Wilson-Kosygin partnership. It is well to ponder again the words of Whittaker Chambers we have in On Target on June 28, "But revolution is always an affair of force, whatever forms the force disguises itself in. Whether the revolutionists prefer to call themselves Fabians, who seek power, by the inevitability of gradualism, or Bolsheviks, who seek power by the dictatorship of the proletariat, the struggle is for power".
Mr. Smith and his fellow Rhodesians chose to refuse that concept. Their choice was made because they understood how precious was the heritage Wilson was destroying. It is now given to the Rhodesians to preserve that heritage, that one day it may be re-imported back into Britain.

HISTORIC CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS

Mr. Eric Butler provides following survey and comments on the recent Canadian Federal Elections:

The success of the Canadian Liberal Party, led by Mr. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, at the Canadian Federal Elections on June 25, was an event of greatest importance, not only for Canada, but for the whole Free World, The elections were an astonishing event in which a comparatively unknown Pierre Elliott Trudeau was elected by a substantial majority who succumbed to an incredible campaign through the mass media. The whole affair reminded me of the type of mass hysteria generated a few years back by the presence of the Beatles. There was something very aptly described as Trudeaumania.
Which raises the question of whether responsible government is possible when such an irresponsible attitude is generated by those controlling the mass media.

I was most interested in a press report pointing out that in the early days of the Confederation, until 1874, electors announced their choice of candidate to a clerk over a counter at the polling station. A political scientist Robert MacGregor Dawson "recognised as an authority on Canadian government" is quoted as saying that "Open voting encouraged bribery and intimidation".
I find it hard to find any real evidence to suggest that government has improved through the replacement of open voting with secret voting.
Bribery and intimidation have never been greater, even if a little more sophisticated. Many electors believe that social welfare bribes at election time offer them the opportunity of voting themselves benefits at the expense of their neighbours in secret.

Until Mr. Trudeau was elected by the Liberal Party as Prime Minister a few months ago, very few Canadians knew much about him. Before they had a chance to find out, Mr. Trudeau suddenly called an election, during which the electors discovered very little more about their Prime Minister - except that he was "different" he was "progressive", and that he stood for "One Canada".
Even one well-known Canadian political journalist, Charles Lynch, admitted just prior to the elections, that he and journalists traveling with Mr. Trudeau during the campaigning, never really learned much about Mr. Trudeau.

One would have thought that the Progressive Conservative Opposition would have attempted to score some political points by asking questions about Mr. Trudeau's background. They did make a feature of Mr. Stanfield's background. Admittedly this background was much more publicly known because the Conservative leader had been Premier of Nova Scotia. But nevertheless there were certain aspects of Mr. Trudeau's background which electors were entitled to know about.

I found in incredible that it was the Conservative Party national officials who instructed that Conservative candidates were not to have anything to do with printed material, which dealt with the Prime Minister's background! This was bitter medicine for many Conservatives, including former leader John Diefenbaker, who said that his background had been thoroughly publicised when he was Prime Minister.
There will be almost certainly a major Conservative Party backlash as a result of what many regard as a "soft" policy, which helped the Liberal Party to win by such a substantial majority.

More than one irate Conservative supporter has told me he believes the Party was sabotaged an the top, pointing out that the National Chairman of the Party, Mr. Eddie Goddman is a Political Zionist and no conservative, and that the target of Mr. John Diefenbaker's most biting criticism, national campaign director Dalton Camp, was educated at the same London School of Economics attended by Mr. Trudeau.

One of the highlights of the campaign was the nation-wide campaign against Mr. Ron Gostick, charged with publishing "hate-literature" on Mr. Trudeau's background prepared by Mr. Pat Walsh former undercover agent with the RCMP. So determined was the press that Mr. Trudeau's background should not be examined, that advertisements quoting from the Prime Minister's own writings on Socialism were refused. Only one major effort was made by the press to refute point-by-point the main charges made against Mr. Trudeau.
A syndicated article by a Mr. Newman claimed that the author had made an exhaustive examination of the facts.
I was astonished to learn that the notorious Professor Harold Laski, whom Mr. Trudeau said he had admired so much, was not a Marxist but a moderate Socialist! Mr. Newman surely knows better.
Mr. Trudeau did not lead a delegation of Communists to the 1952 Moscow Economic Conference, but was simply there along with "respectable" businessmen from the West. The facts are rather different, as exposed in the British House of Commons the following year by Sir Anthony Eden.

The Newman article has merely helped to confirm the view of those who believe that Mr. Trudeau is a Communist in disguise. I am of the opinion that Mr. Trudeau's advisers have done him a serious disservice by attempting to smother an open, rational discussion on Mr. Trudeau's background and his social and economic views. There have been most incredible rumours, including the allegation that the RCMP would not give Mr. Trudeau a security clearance when Mr. Pearson appointed him to his Cabinet. I do not believe that any member of the RCMP would make such an allegation to a Member of Parliament, still less to a member of the general public. But every attempt to suppress or to falsify the established facts about Mr. Trudeau's background results in still more rumors.

There is no doubt that Mr. Trudeau is a convinced Socialist, as he makes clear in his own writings. Canadians should not be surprised therefore if he acts like a Socialist. I can find no evidence that Mr. Trudeau is a British Commonwealth man, and was not surprised to see a report immediately following the elections that Britain will be treated like another foreign country.

Prime Minister Trudeau has already served warning on the Canadian Senate, stressing that it is no be "reformed" immediately. Canada's Upper House possesses little effective power now, but it is certain that in will have even less power after being "reformed".

Both in its domestic and foreign policies, the new Trudeau Government is going to attempt to set Canada on a path radically different from that pursued in the past. It remains to be seen how Canadians are going to react to Mr. Trudeau once Trudeaumania dies out and realities have to be faced.
Mr. Trudeau would find Mr. Harold Wilson most interesting on the subject of post-election losses in popularity!