MARXIST VIOLENCE AT LEAGUE SEMINAR

Those who heard the ABC national news on Saturday evening, September 22, learned that some Marxists felt so strongly about the League's Annual National Seminar on the "New Education" that they felt that some of them should attend. Some did not attend for the purpose of entering the hall, but for demonstrating just how they have benefited from the "New Education".

They painted on the brick walls of the I. Younger Ross Hall big slogans such as "SMASH THE LEAGUE OF RIGHTS." And Mr. Eric Butler was mentioned as a "FASCIST" who should be dealt with. The original signs were painted long before the Seminar was scheduled to start. The actual painting was done by a number of young "activists", but they were merely the instruments of older Marxists who believe that they are masters in the art of psychological warfare.

In the absence of the type of special materials required for removing the work of the Marxist daubers, League representatives were not able to remove the signs before the Seminar started. And then the "activists" returned during the first Paper to "touch up" the signs, which had been partially removed. One can only guess at what takes place in the minds of Marxist sign-writers, but we readily concede that the defacing of a splendid building like the I. Younger Ross Hall was more than annoying to those responsible for the hall. And if it provides the Marxists responsible with any satisfaction we point out that it has cost the League of Rights a large sum of money to have the walls of the hall treated. Perhaps it could be argued that the League is not legally responsible but it has accepted full moral responsibility for the treatment.

Representatives of the Marxists who did pay their entrance fees and attend the Seminar did not attempt to test themselves at question time. In fact one young man appeared to have gone to sleep during Mr. Eric Butler's Paper, "The Politics of the New Education", during which he exposed how it had the full support of the Marxists. But the "activists" outside the hall clearly demonstrated before the evening session that they had been instructed to take the campaign against the Seminar much further. After all, we do not think that the young "activist" carrying the bag of stones was doing this just for exercise!

As flour bombs had been thrown during the afternoon session, we have no doubt that under cover of night it would have been regarded as an act of "Marxist valour" to have thrown a shower of stones through the large glass windows of the hall. But fortunately an incident took place during the Dinner recess, which led to the minimising of this possibility. A group of the young "activists", for whom we have the deepest sympathy, as they were an example of how uncritical youth can be brainwashed by those exploiting them, gave out a pamphlet on "FASCISM" to those entering the hall. League supporters who tried to engage them in discussion were told, amongst other things, that "Fascist Butler" had been interned during the war! Mr. Butler came out to ask how he could have been interned for assisting the Japanese when he had been in the armed forces during the whole period of the Pacific War. A young lady told the gathering "this was general knowledge."

At this stage a League photographer took a photo of the "activists", which resulted in an immediate violent reaction. Eggs were thrown - no doubt these were to have been used later - and an assault was made on the photographer in an endeavour to smash his camera. A League woman supporter was kicked in the shins. At this stage the activists decided to retreat. They do not like their photos being taken. And they no doubt noticed that a League security force was then placed on the hall to ensure that no further daubing or planned acts of violence took place.

Thanks to the Marxists the League of Rights received further national publicity. Increasing numbers of students are making their own investigations about the League, the latest example of this being the invitation from Melbourne Technical College students for a League speaker to address them this week. The League will not be intimidated in any way by Marxists, irrespective of where and how they operate and their many dupes. The 1973 National League Seminar will go down as yet another victory for the League, another step forward with many new contacts. All Papers given at the Seminar will be published in booklet form by the League for a wider circulation of the material presented by the speakers.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PARRAMATTA BY-ELECTION

"Canberra - The Federal Government was guilty of 'political insanity' in the Parramatta by-election campaign, the ACTU president, Mr. Hawke, said yesterday. He criticised Federal Cabinet for announcing during the campaign that Galston, a few miles from Parramatta electorate, was planned as the site for Sydney's second airport...The Federal Opposition leader Mr. Snedden, said national issues had caused the by-election result. He gave notice that he might force the Government to a general election." - The Sun, (Melbourne) Sept. 24th.

The "Opposition" would be well advised not to take the by-election result in Parramatta as conclusive evidence that it would win an immediate general election. Mr. Snedden has obviously had second thoughts following the first flush of enthusiasm concerning the by-election results and is reported in The Australian of September 25th as saying that he would not use the Senate majority to force a double dissolution. There is no doubt that the Galston airport question was a major issue in the Parramatta by-election, and it is generally true that electors use by-elections to censure a Government, but that this does not necessarily mean that they would vote the same way in a general election.
One other factor in the by-election was, beyond doubt, the anti-ALP feeling generated by the imposition of increased interest rates. But this feeling has not yet reached the peak of intensity that must come later.

A win for the Whitlam Government in Parramatta would have been a major disaster. The defeat was a sign of sufficient health in the electorate to reverse the disaster course now being rapidly travelled by Australia. The coming Senate Elections offers the first real opportunity to stimulate a major expression of that health. The Whitlam Government must be decisively defeated in these elections. As yet the "Opposition" offers no real answers to the problems of Australia and for this reason is generating no real enthusiasm amongst electors. But a national non-partisan campaign at the Senate elections stressing basic principles such as the necessity for keeping power divided, can provide the Labor-Socialists with their first real set-back. The way would then be cleared for further regeneration linked with a demand for a genuine solution to the inflation menace and a return to the basic principles of the Federal system of government in Australia.

DISARMAMENT IS A BETRAYAL

"A high-ranking RAAF officer yesterday made an outspoken plea for Australia to maintain strong army, navy and air forces. Air-Commodore J. W. Hubble, the officer commanding the RAAF base at Richmond, near Sydney, said that self-professed experts would say Australia was at peace and did not expect a war for ten or more years. He said the "so-called experts" should remember in 1937 people said there would be no war before 1945. 'Then they were saying at the end of World War II that there would be no more war,' he said. Yet five years after World War II we had the Korean conflict. About the same time Malaysia was faced with attacks from the communist terrorists who threatened the country's security, in 1962 we had the Communist Chinese invade India, having just subjugated Tibet. In 1964-65 we hade the Malaysia-Indonesia confrontation which nearly developed into open conflict. A few years later we had the free-world forces defending the freedom of South Vietnam. We have seen global wars, brush-fire wars and civil wars. Yet none of these events was forecast. History has shown that conflicts have arisen when we least expected them and when we were unprepared. During peace, enemies have taken the initiative and we have suffered losses as a consequence." - The Sun (22/9/73)

Air-Commodore Hubble's warning should not be taken lightly. The big drop in the allocation for defence spending in the last budget - totalling approximately $40million - has been a serious blow to those responsible for Australia's already inadequate defence system. Mr. Barnard seems destined to be Australia's equivalent to America's Robert Macnamara, the man primarily responsible for the fact that the Soviet Union has surged ahead of the West in military potential. Australia will shortly be facing an intensification of guerilla activities in South-East Asia, just as southern Africa is facing a step-up in communist activities, and Labor's attitude to defence constitutes the worst type of appeasement and betrayal.

A DENIAL OF DEMOCRACY

"The Federal Government was denying democracy to the Northern Territory, an independent member of the NT Legislative Council said today. 'People must have a say in their affairs,' he said. 'Without this right you don't have any democracy.' - The Herald (21/9/73)

Mr. Fisher, the Legislative Councillor, was addressing the Commonwealth Parliament Conference. He pointed out that after 62 years of Commonwealth "colonial" rule, the NT Council was still without any real executive function and had no control over financial matters. He said it was an anachronism that in a world where dependent territories were gaining more independence, the Australian Federal Government was reversing this progress in its own territories.

While acknowledging the validity and justice of Mr. Fisher's remarks, the fact is that none of the other States now have control over financial matters, and if the Evatt-Whitlam blueprint for regionalisation is carried through none of the States will have any more autonomy than the Northern Territory. The Labor government, like its predecessor, is certainly exercising "colonialist" rule over former sovereign States and acquiring power at an alarming rate.

CONSUMER SUBSIDIES

"Motorists in some remote areas of Australia could be facing petrol price increases of up to 35 cents a gallon. The Country Party Leader, Mr. Anthony, claimed this in Federal parliament yesterday. He suspected the Federal Government intended to phase out completely subsidies on petrol in country areas." - The Australian (20/9/73)

Whether he understands it or not - and Mr. Anthony has never demonstrated any aptitude for economics - the subsidy on petrol is an example of a consumer subsidy which is passed on to consumers in rural areas. Mr. Anthony stated that the Coomb Report advocated the phasing out of the petrol subsidy, which could increase the cost of petrol by as much as 35 cents per gallon in some remote areas. As fuel costs constitute as much as 5% of all farm costs, this increase can only be passed on in the form of higher food costs to the Australian housewife.

If Opposition parties would devote some time and effort into devising a system of consumer subsidies aimed at reducing basic costs throughout industry, they would begin to offer a genuine alternative to the Mad Hatter policies we are getting at the moment, which would have us believe that inflation can be halted by deliberately raising costs throughout the community.

It is elementary that increased government spending, higher interest charges and additional taxes must be charged into prices. In the growing hostility to the Labor government's blundering financial policies, it should be noted that so far the Opposition has not offered anything but a variation of the same disastrous blunders. Only a realistic financial attack on high taxation, rates, rents, interest charges and public spending can bring lasting health into the economy.

HAMER MAKES IT HAPPEN

"A gigantic chart covers one wall at the offices of the Victorian Council for Social Services in Melbourne. It is the result of four years research and the basis for a plan that will eventually reorganise the lives of all Victorians. The plan is to regionalise the State... 'We are recommending that there be 18 regions rather than the existing 210 municipalities and several other little neighbourhoods with all their inequalities,' said Mr. Benjamin (recently appointed Director). This week the Premier, Mr. Hamer, announced a plan to establish common regions for all government departments." - Sunday Telegraph (23/9/73).

The article goes on: "The VCSS has prepared a report which shows how an initial three-tiered structure of Commonwealth, State and regional authorities could be linked vertically by a central core of board-room-type organisations . . . The final picture shows a central regional council for social development surrounded by representatives of Federal, State and municipalities."

Either Mr. Hamer is completely naive or he is consciously participating in the ultimate destruction of his own State government, for Mr. Whitlam has made it quite clear that he aims to replace the States with the Regional bodies which will be financed and directed by his Ministerial colleague Tom Uren in the Department of Urban and Regional Affairs.

The implications for Local Government are disastrous, and the Federal system is being dismantled before our eyes, with the apparent complicity of Mr. Hamer. If sufficient Local Government representatives can be warned in time, and urged to strongly resist such an intrusion into local affairs, and enough sound State Parliamentarians can be urged to speak out before it is too late, then this centralist takeover can be averted.