THIS MONSTROUS CONFIDENCE TRICK, THIS BOGUS NUMEROLOGY

by Wallace Klinck
Politicians are concerned to become elected and to remain in office. They are under pressure to create more employment (i.e., "jobs") because people including the politicians have been sedulously indoctrinated with the notion, which takes the form of an absolute moral imperative, that the only right to partake of the product of industry is that earned by contributing directly to its creation as a paid "worker". Inevitably, under such circumstances "work" (i.e., "jobs") must be created whether or not they are actually needed, and consequently much of, and an increasing portion, of production must be "crude" because it is artificially driven not so consumers can enjoy the product of the current outpouring of goods but so that they can earn the incomes required to purchase past production.

Current finished production can only be purchased by incomes earned through additional production and/or the assumption of debt in the form of credit issued as repayable bank loans, which loans are of course a charge against and recoverable from future production. As Douglas observed, he could never understand why we must first manufacture a machine-gun in order to derive the financial incomes by which to purchase a cabbage already produced and awaiting consumption.

Faulty Cost-Accounting Conventions
Of course, the inherent deficiency of purchasing power, i.e., the growing chasm between financial costs and prices and consumer income, is due primarily to capital costs included in price--and the more capital (i.e., "tool") intensive and therefore efficient our economy becomes, the greater the deficiency of purchasing becomes both absolutely and relatively. The financial system works counter to every advance in science because of faulty cost accounting conventions which result in an increasingly non-self liquidating price-system.

Efficiency naturally reduces the need for human input in production but the fundamental lack of purchasing power is a relentless factor in dictating the need for further employment of human effort because under the current morality it is only through employment primarily that people can obtain the means to consume the product of industry. So, inevitably we engage in evermore wasteful unnecessary and destructive "work", war being the most effective way of distributing incomes without piling up an even greater mountain of unsaleable goods. (although it piles up a mountain of bogus financial debt) Of course, increasing competition in the struggle for sales, internally and externally, does have an effect of striving for better quality but this does on obviate the tendency toward more gross production for the reasons cited and the morals of industry are subject to deterioration in the struggle for markets.

Douglas was clear regarding the matter
Economics is simply a functional activity of men and women in the world and the quicker it can be accomplished through enhanced efficiency, leaving increased leisure for all, the better will be the results. No one can predict how far advances in production efficiency can go and we really cannot establish any limits. We can only hope that there exist no limits and be eternally grateful for this circumstance. During the 1980's I asked a senior individual in the commercial electronics business when he thought all of the analogue devices would become digital. He looked me directly in the eye and asserted without blinking that this would "never" happen because it was "technically impossible." But increase in knowledge and its refined application to achievement of results is the basis for an evolving civilization.

Whether of not such advancement of knowledge and science is benign or destructive will depend upon our concurrent development in morals and ethics, which because of the abnormal stresses wrought increasingly by adherence to orthodox philosophy and policy, are being degraded to an ever-lower level of quality.
The primary hurdle we face is to make a decisive and irreversible departure from the false dictum that consumption is justified only by "work." Unless we recognize that all organisms have an inalienable right in natural law to draw sustenance from their environment and rearrange our financial accountancy to ensure that every human enjoys the security of this right, mankind will continue down the path to barbarity and destruction.

Modern technology brings financial system to unworkable state?
Douglas believed that the very productive forces unleashed by modern technology would bring the financial system to an increasingly unworkable state which would compel mankind in the very interests of survival to seek and effect the necessary changes to our false system of national cost accountancy. The question is how much suffering must we endure and how close to the brink of extinction must we come before we muster the intelligence and humanity to make the requisite changes.

As Eric de Mare concluded his book "A Matter of Life or Debt" (U.S. ed., 1991): "This monstrous confidence trick, this bogus numerology, this mad metaphysical rite of borrowing oneself out of debt, is still blindly accepted by political leaders of every persuasion all over the world. It is so destructive and so crazy that it may bring all life on this planet to a hideous end. Are we to vanish from this earth without even a whimper of protest against the cause of that possible tragedy? Nothing in the world will, or can, go right until we first get our money sums right."

The central point of Douglas's analysis over ninety years ago was that advances of science are not only increasingly, but exponentially, causing production and employment to become "uncoupled". Surely any sane society would recognize the wonderful blessing that this phenomenon is with its provision and potential of material plenty and cultural efflorescence in leisure for all through release from the historic drudgery imposed by scarcity. What is required is that we alter our system of financial accountancy to ensure that our very real actualized and potential abundance is distributed to the benefit of all citizens as an inalienable right to a share in the magnificent results made possible by our accumulated Cultural Heritage.

We have demonstrated the physical and psychological capacity to deliver the "goods"; we are quite capable of devising a modified system of accountancy whereby all citizens might partake of the "goods". But we are held in thrall to a vicious and false Puritanical so-called "ethic" which demands that if we automated the entire economy we would erect a wall around the resulting surfeit of consumer goods and force the needy and the hungry work-displaced population merely to gaze at the mountain of finished product because of their failure to demonstrate a justification to consume through "work", unnecessary and irrelevant as it has been demonstrated to be.  

COLLECTIVE ACTION? INDIVIDUAL CHOICE? SOCIAL DEMOCRACY?

by Betty Luks
So this nation’s Labor Party leaders are lamenting the fact that the ‘social democrat’ (read Fabian Socialism) parties are ‘on the nose’ world-wide. The PM Julia Gillard thinks that “It falls to us to analyse and understand this contradiction of our age”. Prime minister I suggest the contradiction is in the Labor Party’s basic beliefs and policies rather than in the ‘age’. But then Labor is not alone, political parties of various persuasions have followed an agenda of centralising financial, political and economic power for at least the last fifty years – doing with their hands what they have continually denied with their mouths! (https://www.alp.org.au/special-pages/pm-special-address-crc/)

Carefully analyse the headlines above – individual choice is sandwiched between ‘collective action’ and ‘social democracy’. Genuine democracy means the right of the individual to govern his/her own life without the incessant interference of governments and their busybody bureaucrats. In a genuine democracy governments would have limited powers. Fat chance the individual has of deciding for his own life within this rigid financial-corporate-government straight-jacket at present squeezing the life out of us all.

Collective Action? In contrast to a Socialist or Collectivist Society a Free Society exists entirely for the mutual benefit of the people who comprise it, apart from which it has no justification for existence.
But then these power-wielders don’t take into account human nature, the inner nature. What politicians of all shades are witnessing is the frustrated revolt of the individual to the subordination of his true self to the diktats of these despots. Yes, human beings do come together in groups to produce their daily bread with the machines and technology that have been inherited from the past, but there is more to an organic society than that. Soviet style ‘collective’ production proved to be an utter failure. Just as Julia’s government-organised solar-power scheme proved such a disaster.
Julia, a society in which people are constantly making irresponsible decisions, the consequences of which return to other people rather than themselves is a Slave Society.

Individual Choice? The human's spirit cries out for the freedom to develop his inner self – his soul, his own individuality, his personality, and, in harmony and agreement with his fellow human beings, will work together for their mutual benefit.
To sum up: Any human association will only work satisfactorily so long as its individual members believe they are obtaining benefits from it. Australians have had the wool pulled away from their eyes and see the politicians for what they are and the mess they have made of this nation. But we can’t leave things as they are now, it is time for Australians to come together and agree together to save ourselves from the storms bearing down upon us.  

LABOR HEAVYWEIGHTS ‘UNLOAD’ ON GILLARD AND RIVAL

Source: Andrew Bolt – Saturday, September 17, 11 (04:49 pm)
“When the ship is sinking, everyone has advice for the crew. Here’s Graham Richardson: Julia Gillard, he says, has ‘’this incredible self-belief [which] is totally unjustified. She listens to no one because she thinks she understands, and she hasn’t got a clue. There are plenty of good people around, if you include the cabinet, but she is not listening to any of them.’’…
And he insists Labor did not underestimate the electorate’s revulsion at the axing of Rudd. There was only a ‘’gross overestimation of Gillard’s ability’’.”  

HUMAN BEHAVIOUR HAS NOT HAD A FAIR CHANCE

by Wallace Klinck
The financial system inversely represents the real economy--the actual physical facts of production and consumption. Under such circumstances, evermore artificial activity is required to generate required purchasing-power--increasingly wasteful and destructive activity eventuating inevitably in war. Under such circumstances humanity is subject to entirely unnatural conditions, pressures, anxieties and fears which automatically trigger defensive and hostile reactions.

Human behaviour has not had a fair chance to display its real face under the existing financial system because with every genuine advance in technology, where true efficiency is increased and human energy expenditure relatively reduced, that very financial system denies us the benefits of abundance realisable through such real production advances by creating a continuous rise in financial costs and prices and the need for ever-increasing financial debt in order to facilitate the wheels of production and consumption.  

THE RELIGION OF IMMIGRATION

y James Reed
Want proof that immigration and multiculturalism have become a powerful new religion? In the US four bishops are suing the State of Alabama, claiming that the state’s new anti-immigration laws are unconstitutional, violating the right to religious freedom. (The Australian, August 18, 2011, p.9) It, allegedly, becomes “a crime to follow God’s command to be Good Samaritans.” The laws make it illegal to provide shelter or transportation to immigrants entering Alabama illegally.

According to one bishop this law “attacks what it means to be a Christian”. This is absurd. The Biblical story of the Good Samaritan while involving helping a person in need get on his way again, does not involve taking him in. The story is about compassion, not immigration – in fact, if anything, the story is about emigration, helping the stranger be on his way. The mainstream churches are hooked on migrants, and are busy reworking their worldview to service a non-white world.  

AUSTRALIA AND THE FALL OF ASIA

by James Reed
Greg Sheridan (Neighbourhood Botch”, The Weekend Australian Review, June 4-5, 2011) gave a glowing review of Michael Wesley’s “There Goes the Neighbourhood: Australia and the Rise of Asia”, (New South, Sydney, 2011). The cover of the book has an endorsement by The Australian’s Paul Kelly. The book has this to say about Asian immigration to Australia: “the visceral discomfort of most Australians with the influx of Asian immigrants has largely been on the wane. Australia’s non-discriminating immigration policy has not resulted in the country being ‘swamped by Asians’ as [Pauline] Hanson predicted.” (p.134)

But, contrary to Wesley, who from my examination of the book does not engage in any detailed study of opinion polls to back those statements up, Hanson is correct. Australia’s immigration intake is primarily Asian and has been for some time – the “Yellow Australia” policy I call it. That is what Asianisation is about. Nor does Wesley consider any challenges to the “future of Asia” theme such as ecological breakdown and likely financial crashes. All in all, this is a very conventional book pushing the same tired old line. Every wonder why there is no academic text from any Australian publisher criticising the Asianisation dogma? It is obvious what this says about publishing and academia.  

THE ATTACK OF THE KILLER TV!

by James Reed
So, I was right after all! Researchers at the University of Queensland and Melbourne’s BakerIDI Heart and Diabetes Institute have found that TV watching is a health risk: every hour watching TV after the age of 25 reduces life expectancy by around 22 minutes. (The Australian, August 17, 2011, p.9) Watch TV for six hours a day and lose about five years of life.
The causal explanation seems to be lifestyle reasons such as lack of exercise. However I wonder if there could be something more to it, something my mother warned me about, that TV rots the brain. Could the trash shown on TV also be a factor contributing to ill-health?  

BOB BROWN & GLOBAL PARLIAMENT/WORLD GOVERNMENT

by James Reed
Good on ya Bob, good to see you opening your mouth ever wider. Australian Greens leader Bob Brown wants Australia to be part of a push for a global parliament, a “people’s assembly.” The push, coming from one worlders at the UN and EU, would be based on “one person, one vote, one value.” (The Age, June 30, 2011) According to Bob the Brown (not the Green): “The issue has been on the books for a couple of centuries – it is going to get steam as we become a global community and have to find a means for sorting out our global destiny…”
The opposite of green. Bob has revealed his true colours, not “green” but “brown”/”Greens”, true ecologists, advocate a decentralised world. Giving one vote to each individual regardless of race, ethnicity and nation will mean that China and India would rule the world. If China and India decide that Australia should be environmentally raped even faster than it is now, then it will be. And as one commentator says on The Age website: “The UN is already the most corrupt and criminal organization on Earth”. Anyway, with the loopy Greens having the balance of power in the Senate, hang onto your hat and get ready for the ride of your life as more insanity comes our way.

What about the prospects of a World Government? That as we know is the New World Order agenda. However one of the emerging problems for the global elites is that support for open borders primarily comes from Northern European Whites (Nordics). If they are wiped out by mass migration, support for global control will plummet. New borders will be established in a global Third World. It won’t really matter what government the Elites try to impose on this anarchy of warring tribes because the world as we know it, and They know it, would have ended.  

CONSERVATIVE PESSIMISM

by Chris Knight
Leading US journalist John Derbyshire’s “We are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism”, Crown Forum, New York 2009), is a highly readable, often humorous rebuttal of the smiley-faced optimism which has come to dominate the conservative movement.
Pessimism should not be characterised as philosophers do (e.g., James Sully, “Pessimism: A History and Criticism”, (Henry King, London, 1877)), as seeing this world as the worst of possible worlds, or the view that it is better not to have been born at all. Rather pessimism, or at least conservative pessimism, is the doctrine “that there is little hope for improvement in this world; that such small hope as there is should be directed towards the actions of one, or a few; and that most of what governments do is wicked, when not merely pointless and counterproductive.” (p.5) The world may be getting worse, but that in itself is not grounds for melancholic resignation because pessimism does not imply determinism or fatalism, the idea that history has already been written and thus is predetermined.

Derbyshire looks at a number of topics including popular culture, sex/feminism, human nature, religion, war, immigration and economic globalisation. In general he takes the politically incorrect line on all of these topics. The discussion of economic globalisation is limited by lack of consideration of financial realities and a recognition that the answer lies in economic localism as represented by social credit.
Derbyshire is at his best in attacking the myth of “diversity”, roughly equivalent to our multiculturalism.
Diversity is nothing to celebrate he tells us in chapter 2 and it is more likely than not “that the United States might cease to exist as a nation-state because of ethnic conflict”. (p.15)
He discusses at length political scientist Robert Putnum’s paper “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century”, a paper which gives empirical evidence that ethnic diversity (in the short-term Putnam alleges nervously) leads to a decline in social capital and community integration. Putnum’s study was done in 2000 and not published until 2006/2007, Derbyshire conjectures, because of Putnam’s embrace of the “diversity” ideology. (p.22)

Derbyshire’s own formulation of the diversity ideology is as follows: “Different populations of different races, customs, religions and preferences, can be mixed together in any numbers or proportions at all, with harmonious result. Not only will the result be harmonious, it will be beneficial to all the people thus mixed. They will be better and happier than if they had been left to stagnate in dull homogeneity.” (p.22) Derbyshire rightly notes that this “cult is a false ideology, rooted, like all false ideologies, in wishful thinking and optimistic happy talk about human nature.” (p.22)
He continues: “The remarkable thing about the Diversity cult is that all the circumstances of the actual human world refute its tenets, wherever we look. I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that there has never been an ideology so heartily and jealously embraced by all the main institutions of a society, that was at the same time so obviously at odds with the evidence of our senses. It is as if the entire Western world had committed itself to the belief that human beings can fly by flapping their arms.” (p.25)

“Diversity-the-ideology is in fact a very pure example of the kind of magical, counterfactual thinking that has led conservatives astray. By letting this ideology triumph unchallenged – even, in some deplorable cases, embracing it – we have surrendered key political positions: equal treatment under the law, allegiance to one nation, freedom of association, public education in one language… By holding firmly to a pessimistic, realistic view of what is and is not possible in a society of different ethnicities, we might have maintained the principles of a free republic, and saved ourselves much trouble and expense.” (p.25)
Diversity causes social dissolution and rather than making society better, makes society worse. This, we at this site have said for a long time, however it is satisfying to see a mainstream journalist say it, although it’s getting late in the day.  

Further listening: "Uphold the Torch of Freedom"

SHHH! IT’S SHARIA LAW

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Anti-Sharia (ie Fundamentalist Islamic) law campaigner Maryam Namazie has been in Australia warning Australia to learn from the mistakes about Sharia law made by Britain. (The Australian, August 26, 2011, p.33) In Britain, she alleges, the media have found critics of the introduction of Sharia law too controversial to give a voice to. The British government has given some form of legal recognition to Islamic tribunals using Sharia rather than British law in dispute resolution. Further, the British Left in some parts has supported radical Islam, and parts of the Left are doing this in Australia as well. In Britain, the Left join street marches with Islamists who would hang or behead homosexuals.

Namazie’s organisation, One Law for All, sees Sharia law as a threat to the rule of law and equal rights and the opposite of majority rights, denying Muslims who are not radicals of their rights. Of course, when Sharia grows and dominates the entire society, the rights of non-Muslims could also be threatened. Other Australian researchers have found that there is essentially a shadow legal system in Australia through Sharia law, permitting polygamous and underage marriages.

According to Namazie:
“The inhumanity and misogyny that is found in a sentence that stones people to death is very much the same that denies people divorce and child custody in the family aspects of the law. It is just a matter of degree. In Britain, just because hands are not being cut off it still denies women and children their rights in the family – freedom from violence and to have the same rights and freedoms that are available to other citizens.” Indeed, we are witnessing the early stages of the breakup of the West into a cluster of warring tribes.  

THE CULTURA OF CRITIQUE

by Peter Ewer
Some elements of the Australian liberal-left have had a go at Keith Windschuttle who had one of his papers cited by the Oslo killer. The article in question is “The Adversary Culture: The perverse Anti-Westernism of the Cultural Elite”. Windschuttle takes cultural Marxists and feminists to task for their open embrace of cultural relativism – thus Western feminists now accept that the surgical removal of the clitoris in Muslim/African culture is legitimate, Germaine Greer being one example.

The culture of critique holds that Western culture is flawed and non-Western cultures simply fantastic. Windshcuttle goes on to list a number of PC academics whose works have been shown to be flawed. He himself has criticised the Tasmanian genocide ideology. He also cites the case of US writer Ward Churchill who had represented himself as an American Indian, but is not and who fabricated “evidence” in no less than six books and eleven published academic articles.” Anti-Western writers like lefty Andre Gunder Frank, who in ReOrient claims that the West developed on mighty Asia’s shoulders, are also refuted by more scholarly works such as Niall Ferguson’s Empire (2003).

All in all Windschuttle has written extremely important works that qualify him to be – rather than say Robert Manne – Australia’s leading intellectual. As a former man of the left, doing penance for his sins, he really knows the weaknesses of the left. May he type ever onwards!

AFTER AMERICA: THE DIME DROPS

by James Reed
In “America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It,” journalist Mark Steyn argued that economics, demography and Islamic immigration (Islamisation doomed Europe. Now in “After America: Get Ready for Armageddon”, (Regnery Publishing, Washington DC, 2011) he argues that America is also finished. America is making the same big government and cultural mistakes as Europe, although China presumably survives but being a dictatorship is incapable of playing the role of global hegemon. (p.101) The possibility of a global dictatorship seems not to have occurred to him.

Further, when reading “America Alone” I saw the immediate refutation of Steyn, posed by the creation of a minority of White America. Steyn avoids discussing the big race issues. He mentions that the majority of Arizona’s school children are Hispanic so Arizona’s future is a “Hispanic society”. (p.243) To this he says: “Maybe it’ll work out swell. The citizenry never voted for it, but they got it anyway. Because all the smart guys bemoaning the irrational bigots knew what was best for them”. (p.243) And that’s about it. Steyn should have pursued this thought if he wanted a truly land shaking book, unfortunately we get more of the same.