FARMING IN AUSTRALIAby
Patrick O'Shea
The ordinary Australian farmer will be pleased to know he is
facing extinction. Do you not think so? It is official socialist policy.
And
this is in spite of the fact the resilient Australian primary producers collectively
grow, every year, enough food and fibre to sustain at least 200 million people
on planet earth. The enormous real wealth Australian farmers each year bring into
existence is truly astounding.
But our socialist planners are not happy with
that abundance being in 'free enterprise' hands - and their policies attest to
that fact. After crippling taxation, bank interest and charges and ever-rising
costs of production, the farmer's return for effort is a mere pittance.
Come,
tell me. Do you not think so? Or is it just fanciful thinking on my part? Have
you never asked why the little bloke on his family farm is going out backwards?
Australia's farmers are some of the most productive per capita in the world!
But
under the present rules, their servitude will not last much longer. Not only are
they dying out through grinding overwork and age, not to mention those who have
taken their own lives, but steeply rising inflationary costs of production with
low returns are gradually finishing them off. Many older ones, worn out from the
years of grinding effort, are selling to neighbours, who are in turn deceiving
themselves and think by getting bigger they at least will last a little longer.
Communism
is Socialism in a hurry
The Soviet Socialist dictator, Joseph Stalin, used
more brutal and direct tactics to achieve the same end. He confiscated their harvests
and starved the peasant farmers, thereby forcing them off their land and setting
up collectivist 'State' farming with slave labour. Stalin didn't have the Fabian
Socialists' patience; their plan is to gradually achieve the same objectives by
'other means'.
Not for them free enterprise, nor private property. No family
farm is to be tolerated under their tyrannical system. Only, gradually, more and
more centralisation and control 'til there is full 'State' control. The poor foot
soldiers supporting the so-called Socialist struggle against what they perceive
to be Capitalism, can't see they are captives of the same unjust money system
that is bent on destroying the ordinary farmer.
This all adds up to a great
sub-plot fit for a modern Australian-Greek Tragedy. Tragedies always line up conflicting
parties and events to give that action a particular form and meaning. In this
case, it is the demise of the family farm in Australia.
You ask, but what of
the big corporate investors?
Aren't they aiming to be the new face of agriculture?
Yes, they are. The big corporate investor plans to use tax incentives for 'write
offs' and tax off-sets and economy of scale to monopolise production and 'the
market'.
There you have all the ingredients for this Great Tragedy
On
one side are the independent, free enterprise farmers. Family men often with a
farming heritage stretching back four or five generations at least. They appreciate
the importance of acting as caring custodians of the land with sound farming practices
- it is in their genes, in their blood. They know it is the family farm that keeps
rural communities going: the schools, the churches, the sports' teams and other
cultural activities, the small service industries, the local businesses, etc.
On the other side of this Great Tragedy are the black-caped man-eating ogres,
the money men whose financial system is continuously debasing our currency.
All
banking power today is centred in the rules and complexities of the International
Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF was established during a critical period during World
War II by exerting 'strong-arm financial tactics' upon selected nations at the
Bretton Woods gathering. At the time the Allies, including Australia, were hard
put against Germany and Japan and were coerced into joining the IMF and later
the World Bank. Sixty years later, lesser and greater nations, including Great
Britain, have now no way of escaping IMF control. Background
to the International Monetary Fund
On 17 May 1944, the Allied Supreme Command
tentatively fixed 5 June as D-Day for the invasion of Normandy; this was the most
important decision of the war and was a jealously guarded top secret. Nine days
after the D-Day decision was taken, and eleven days before the invasion commenced,
representatives of many nations, including Australia and New Zealand were invited
by the powers in Washington, to attend a conference at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire.
What came to be known as the Bretton Woods Agreement set up the international
financial structures, which, in time and effect, over-arched and over-ruled the
financial sovereignty of the individual nations.
The
Chief Architect - Communist Traitor Harry Dexter White
The architect, the
author of this Great Plan, was none other than the Communist traitor, Harry Dexter
White. According to a report by the Internal Security Subcommittee of the US Senate
30 July, 1953 on "Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments"
the former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury and referred to as the "chief
architect of the International Monetary Fund" Harry Dexter White is listed
as a leading member of a Communist spy ring planted in the U.S. Treasury…
White, according to the report, was the most useful agent the Soviet had for planting
spies in U.S. Government Departments, his recommendations carrying great weight
everywhere.**
Central Banking system
All
central banks have been badgered to comply with the IMF's stringent guidelines
and commands. No matter what particular need we have as a nation, or what the
elected Government of the day has promised to do, the IMF is in control of our
economy through the financial mechanism.
The IMF, directly, indirectly and
even from a distance, controls and directs the destiny of every man, woman and
child in this nation.
We are led to believe the Reserve Bank of Australia's
concerns are for Australia and Australians. We are led to believe it was set up
to 'monitor' our money supply. Other times, when it suits our leaders to say so,
we are told the Reserve Bank keeps at arms length to our Federal Government, so
as to retain its independence.
Monetary policy out of control
An
eminent authority on financial management Dr Frank Shostak has issued a warning:
"The Reserve Bank monetary policy is out of control, that means inflation
is heading up and interest rates are set to rise." (Weekend Australian April
21-22 2007 p.34)
Dr. Shostak believes the Reserve Bank uses incorrect definitions
of inflation. As "Man Financial's" chief economist, the world's largest
Investment Fund, one would think he had a good grasp of the fundamentals of finance.
His parent company controls US$56 billion of investment funds.
What
he is saying is this
Inflation debases our currency. Which means, in effect,
the Reserve Bank's policies are inflationary and the debt-issued money brought
into existence by the banking system, offers family farmers no long-term assurance
under the present financial rules that things will get better.
Can we appeal
to our leaders and learned men in power and point out to them our currency woes
and money system is flogging everyone to death. We need transparency and accountability
in these matters because farmers have to live by the results of Reserve Bank decisions.
At this point our money has lost all relevance.
The Great Rural Tragedy
is gradually being played out to its final conclusion
The doctrinaire socialists
totally support the vicious monetary policies of the IMF and its administrative
arm in Australia - the Reserve Bank - against the Australian Family farm.
They
patiently await the destruction of the small independent landowners. The Fabian
Socialists abhor the idea of private property, therefore support any inflationary
financial mechanism that eats away at the supports of private property - and surely
one of those supports is a stable and non-inflationary national financial system?
When
in Opposition they supported John Howard's Economic Rationalism; it meant all
trade barriers protecting our farmers and manufacturers from cheap labour imports
were lowered. The policy 'threw them to the wolves' of so-called 'free trade'.
What
a Fabian Socialist dream. What a vision. They are to be pitied. By definition
"A doctrinaire socialist is an unpractical theorist deposed to carry principles
to logical but unworkable extremes."
The Role of the Reserve Bank
of Australia
What is, or should be, the role of the Reserve Bank? Where
does 'Duty of Care' come into the equation and is there a way we can fight back?
The
Charter of the Reserve Bank of Australia states
The Reserve Bank of Australia
(RBA) is responsible for formulating and implementing monetary policy. The Board's
obligation with respect to monetary policy are laid our in the Reserve Bank Act
1959. Section 10 (2) of the Act, which is often referred to as the Bank's 'charter',
says:
"It is the duty of the Reserve Bank Board, within the limits of
its powers, to ensure that the monetary and banking policy of the Bank is directed
to the greatest advantage of the people of Australia and that the powers of the
Bank …are exercised in such manner as, in the opinion of the Reserve Bank
Board, will best contribute to:
§ the stability of the currency of Australia
§
the maintenance of full employment in Australia; and
§ the economic prosperity
and welfare of the people of Australia."
Banks of Issue 'Duty of
Care'
We must familiarise ourselves with "Banks of Issue" positions
regarding Duty of Care.
"What must be understood is all banks create
credit."
"In their licensed charter under Duty of Care a bank must
have equal concern regarding their client's position as they do their own interests.
Duty of Care is regarded as a moral incumbent, it is set apart from likes and
dislikes, or any external compulsion, to a principle which may be abstract in
the highest sense."
That simply means that our Federal Government and
Reserve Bank need to rethink all deliberations - immediately. Then both Government
and Bank must come to terms with what policies are necessary to ensure that our
nation's money system works for the benefit of all Australians.
Accountability
must apply to our democratically elected parliamentary representatives. For too
long they have compromised their position in such matters. For too long they have
been partisan in their policies rather than governing for the Common Good - for
ALL Australians.
Our shortened farmer's life is too high a price to pay
for the rule of such an inane abstraction of debt- financing. It counters and
constricts all efforts by all Australians to work towards a better life for themselves
and future generations.
**
Further essential reading:
"The
Bretton Woods Plot" by A.N. Field $8.00 posted;
"The Money Trick,"
by The Institute of Economic Democracy $13.00 posted;
"The Story of the
Commonwealth Bank" by D. J. Amos, $8.00 posted.
All booklets available
from Heritage Book Services and Veritas Publishing Co. |
PRESSURE
ON RUDD TO 'RUSH' REPUBLICFrom David Flint's
Opinion Column:
Kevin Rudd has been issued with a "progressive left"
challenge to "drastically accelerate the shift to a republic," according to Dennis
Shanahan, Political Editor of The Australian 26 February, 2008 ("PM hears
long-lost call of the Left.")
In a series of essays edited by Melbourne academic
and former Fairfax columnist Robert Manne, a number of apparently self styled
"public intellectuals" have directed a series of appeals to the Prime Minister.
Mr. Shanahan makes the point that many of the ideas are not only "politically
difficult," some are suicidal. A number are directly opposed to Mr. Rudd's stated
position before the election. These public intellectuals are quite brazen. Imagining
that his "thinking may be different now that he has succeeded in winning the election,"
they want Mr. Rudd to open himself up to charges of bad faith, if not broken promises.
A senior research fellow at Sydney University and republican advocate and
historian Dr Mark McKenna, urges Mr Rudd to give priority to creating a republic.
Call to abandon head of state argument
Dr.
McKenna is one of two prominent republicans who have suggested in recent years
that the republicans abandon their campaign that a republic will ensure we have
an Australian as Head of State.
I remember making the point in an encounter
with Dr. McKenna on the BBC during the referendum campaign that the Governor-General
is Head of State. Constitutional monarchists have taken some comfort from these
arguments. There can be no doubt that there is a widespread acceptance that the
Governor-General is Head of State. Other proposals
to Mr. Rudd are to introduce a charter of rights, a constitutional preamble recognizing
indigenous Australians, to do away with 99-year leases on Aboriginal land, overhaul
negative gearing , ban any new coal-fired power plant in NSW, limit the first
home owners grant, tax the family home, and introduce punitive laws on electricity
generation and car emissions. Call unwelcome;
Mr. Rudd owes them nothing
This call from "friends" of the government is
unlikely to be welcome. In any event, if such an acceleration of the republican
proposal were to occur, rather than the result of a call by friendly public intellectuals,
it would be more likely to come from of an internal factional deal either about
another totally unrelated agenda, or about positions which are to be filled. A
recent example was when the New South Wales government suddenly revived[i], in
the dead of night, a dormant bill to end the politicians' oaths of allegiance
to the Sovereign, and in the week before the last Royal Visit.
This puerile
insult was most likely the result of some deal whereby a lunatic fringe, who wanted
to make a point, had promised support on some unrelated matter. It is hard to
believe that the whole government of New South Wales would have acted so shabbily
without at least some resulting advantage. But this is how politicians can operate.
That is why we don't want the Australian Crown replaced by more politicians. The
Prime Minister would be well advised to ignore this impertinent and foolish call
for him to leave himself open to charges of acting in bad faith and breaking promises.
Mr. Rudd won the election by his efforts. It was not because of and indeed, it
was in spite of, the opinions of a claque of self styled public intellectuals.
He owes them nothing. |
