|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
28 July 1978. Thought for the Week: ".... it is permitted to anyone to say what he pleases, but the Press is free to take notice of what he says or not. It can condemn any 'truth' to death simply by not undertaking its communication to the world - a terrible censorship of silence, which is all the more potent in that the masses of newspaper readers are absolutely unaware that it exists."
CHAIRMAN MAL'S ARROGANCE
Prime Minister Fraser made it brutally clear last week that, as far as he is concerned, the coming Budget session of the Federal Parliament is not for the purpose of free debate concerning the Budget, with perhaps some Members of Parliament seeking to represent their electors by pressing for tax reductions instead of voting like rubber stamps for increases decided upon by Mr. Fraser and his "advisers".
Commenting on speculation that family allowances
for the first child were to be abolished in the Budget, Mr. Fraser said,
"I don't know if people want to go on giving advice over the next three
or four weeks, but I am just putting them on notice that the decisions
have in fact been made and if there is any further free advice coming
it should have been made earlier." In other words, the Budget decisions
will stand irrespective of who complains.
Prime Minister Fraser is confident that his restive
backbench Members will be kept in line by reminding them that they owe
their places in Parliament to him. In reality many of them owe their
places to the electorate's deep-seated fear of a return to office of
Mr.Gough Whitlam. Backbench Members should be reminded that by the time
the next Federal elections take place, Mr. Fraser will be a liability,
not an asset. Of course, the Fraser strategy is to take advantage of
the fact that the Government does not have to face the electors for
another 2.5 years. And obsessed with the view that harsh, restrictive
policies are essential to "get the economy moving", if these policies
can be imposed now, by the time of the next elections their beneficial
results will be starting to flow. But Mr. Fraser is fooling himself.
Last week's announcement that the Government was borrowing more money from overseas brought the total overseas borrowings by the Fraser Government to over $2,000 million. That was the amount the Whitlam Government tried to borrow. We have said before, and repeat it now, that it is possible for the Fraser Government to decrease fractionally the rate of inflation (please note that inflation itself still continues), the price being more unemployed and business dislocation. The Marxists are all delighted.
There is only one way to reduce inflation without economic dislocation, and that is by reducing taxes, taxes which inflate prices and reduce purchasing power. Mr. Fraser may feel confident that he can safely ignore the growing demand that the abolition of Sales Tax is the first essential step towards putting the nation on a recovery course; that the views of other people can be treated with contempt. Unless Mr. Fraser starts to act like a democratic leader, instead of acting like Chairman Mal, he is going to find that he will finish like his arrogant predecessor, Mr. Gough Whitlam.
FROM BRITISH 'ON TARGET' (1st and 15th July '78)
This edition of British On Target published highlights of a special report (10/5/78) which an American Review of the News reporter had with a former top official of the U.S.R. Academy of Science, Dr. Igor Glagolev, who defected to the West. Because of the limitations of space we are able to republish only some "highlights of the highlights":
Question: Dr. Glagolev, what is the Soviet goal
Question: Does the small and illegal South African
Communist Party play much of a role in the development of propaganda?
Question: Dr. Glagolev, which Soviet agencies
or departments co-ordinate manipulation of the press and communications
media in the Free World?
Question: Journalists in the West to the Soviet
Question: What are some recent examples of disinformation
Question: Dr. Glagolev, have you any suggestions
as to how the Communist policy of expansion, of promoting dictatorships
can be blocked?
The case of the Soviet dissidents has exposed once again the moral decadence and hypocrisy of Western political leaders, typical of these being Prime Minister Fraser. On the subject of Rhodesia and South Africa, no one has beat the moral drum harder than Mr. Fraser. The South African policy of separate development (apartheid) is so bad, says Mr. Fraser, that Australian cricketers and other sportsmen cannot be permitted to play against South Africans. This would allegedly indicate official support for South Africa's "immoral" and "repressive" policies. But what about the Soviet Union, where repression dwarfs even the alleged crimes of South Africa? Surely if Australians are permitted by the Government to compete in the Moscow Olympic games, this will mean official condoning of the Soviet's criminal policies? What about this, Mr. Prime Minister? And it would be instructive to hear a spokesman for the World Council of Churches on the subject of the Soviet's brutal jailing of those who dare to criticise the Moscow dictators.
We happen to be in agreement with Mr. Bob Hawke when he says (Australian July 22) that technological development is seriously threatening to close up employment opportunities in the tertiary sector. By "tertiary sector" we understand the service industries such as typing, secretarial communications, advertising, banking, insurance, etc., etc. We know that computerisation, cybernetics are slicing into the need for the "old-fashioned" typist-clerk for example, in preparation of files and records. These are now "stored" indefinitely in computer banks! But the march of automation doesn't apply to the tertiary sector of the economy only. It also applies to the secondary industries, and yes, to the primary industries. Yet there are still economists who insist that automation does NOT create unemployment: an actionist in W.A. very recently sent us a photostat of an economics textbook section he is studying in an economics course which asserts such. Realistically, there is nothing wrong with automation. It is not a "problem". It only seems so because of the utterly fallacious system of finance economics under which we grind; and which in turn creates a false social climate. For example, the "natural aristocracy" in the community tends to become submerged by the ruthless, the aggressive, the acquisitive, all with that extra intelligence required to "work" the system. The meek and gentle tend to stay submerged along with the unintelligent and the lazy. Modern society's "aristocracy" is that of money: "those with the dough are all the go!" Enough said. The Anglican Bishop of Oxford (U.K.) in 1955 put forward the Christian view on automation: "Man's life, on any Christian view, is something far greater and more profound than his capacity to produce goods or organise their production. Freedom from unnecessary work is something to be welcomed and even extended as far as possible."
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|