|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
12 August 1983. Thought for the Week: "It appears to be in the nature of the Universe that the misuse of a 'means' results in the breakdown of the means misused. For instance, the centralisation, which is so rampant, is claimed to be in the interest of efficiency. But civilisation was never so inefficient as it is today. We have unimaginable and unthinkable production - yes. And with it, less security, less leisure, more suicides, more lunacy. Is that efficiency? By the canon of dialectical materialism it may be."
C.H. Douglas, in Whose Service is Perfect Freedom.
TIGHTENING THE NOOSE
The financial world has been watching over the last few weeks to see whether Brazil can get itself off the debt hook. Its foreign debt is $US 90,000 million ($A 102,000m.) and there is no way it can avoid default. At the end of June it was anticipated that the International Monetary Fund could come up with some package, which would postpone the inevitable for a little longer. But the terms demanded by the I.M.F. were so draconian that they sparked riots and demonstrations throughout Brazil. So the I.M.F. is withholding promised loans, and Brazil has consequently ceased almost all imports, this in turn crippling export industries.
The Australian (August 2nd) said:
"The IMF negotiations are still going on and the most realistic
expectation is that the country only will be able to count
on the extra resources it needs to pay off arrears and rebuild
an essential margin of liquidity as from the last quarter
of the current year," the Government said. It called the controls
International Business Week (July 25, 1983) gave a more graphic picture: "Brazilian workers struck at a government owned oil refinery outside Sao-Paulo in July, joining thousands of others walking out of nearby Ford, General Motors and other auto plants. The Unions were protesting wage cuts ordered by President Joao Baptista de Figuero to satisfy demands by the International Monetary Fund to curb inflation in exchange for emergency loans. In Argentina, workers threatened by similar conditions from the IMF are expected to vote the popular Peronists into power in the upcoming elections. A strong group within the Peronists pledges to declare a moratorium on Argentina's $19.6 billion debt to Western - mostly American - banks once the party takes office.
In Mexico, unemployment is soaring, crime is rising, and the exodus of illegal immigrants to the US is up sharply as government measures to clamp down on the economy - again, demanded by the IMF lead to lower growth and the decline of the private sector.... Everywhere in Latin America, the choice between social stability and economic restraint is becoming a heated political issue. Caught in the middle is the global lender and financial cop, the IMF, headed by Jacques de Larosiere " All of which leads one to ask: "How does President Reagan expect to win a war in central America, when Latin Americans are being squeezed into starvation in order to repay the Wall Street Bankers?
MORE POWER TO THE COMMONWEALTH
"In declaring the Victorian Government oil pipeline tax invalid, the High Court has, in barely a month, concentrated more power in the hands of the Commonwealth. The decision strikes at the heart of the States' existence: fiscal independence." - Editorial, The Australian, August 8th.
As we remarked a few issues back (July 8th) it was the late Dr. Herbert Vere Evatt, Leader of the Federal A.L.P. Opposition for some years, who saw that it was possible to extend the power of the Federal Government over the six States by the use of legislation based on the 'external affairs' powers of the Australian Constitution. Dr. Evatt was, of course, a Fabian Socialist; hence very much the centralist.
There have been others who have seen
that the Australian High Court could be used to by-pass the
Constitution, traditionally changed only by proper national
referendum. We have before us a photostat of an article published
in The Courier-Mail (Brisbane) of March 27th, 1969
which discloses that (then) Professor Zelman Cowen saw clearly
the implications of the foregoing: "Because of repeated failures
at referenda, the days when governments tried to change the
Constitution were gone.... "Formal amendment of the Constitution
is a dead duck..."
"Mr. Neville Crew told the forum Australians who were concerned with decentralisation too often ignored 'the simple fact' that centralism and the reduction of State rights and State autonomy had developed rapidly during the last 20 years of Federal Liberal and Country Party Government. "Education was becoming centralised because of its domination by the Federal Government under the guise of standardisation and uniformity and even university education was controlled by the Federal Government through its control of finance."
This new High Court decision has thrown a question mark over the validity of other States' taxes: Victoria will now be forced to refund some tens of millions of dollars to those bodies taxed. Whether this tax was just or not, the point of significance is that this most recent High Court decision is yet another attack on the sovereignty of the States. Why? Because it makes the States even more dependent on Canberra for revenue - "The man who pays the piper calls the tune."
The Australian rather naively, in our opinion, comments that "It is now up to the Commonwealth to reverse that trend (of centralisation) and restore the Constitution to the people". The very last thing, which the Socialists/Communists would do, would be to decentralise political and economic power into the hands of the people. Their ''religion'' (a political philosophy held with a religious zeal) has its high priests preaching that political and economic centralisation is in the nature of reality for man and therefore most desirable for him. Rubbish, of course; and quite evil. This is an anti-religious view of Man, holding that Man should be subservient to great political and economic forces.
Our own view of Man is that all organisations should exist only to serve the individual! "The Sabbath was made for Man, not Man for the Sabbath."
We make the point that the political and economic centralisation that has come about (with much more to come!) is not coincidental: it is intentional the direct result of a policy. (Read "Centralisation - The Policy of Satanism", Price: 0.55 cents from all League bookshops). It is pointless for The Australian to editorialise that "The Commonwealth must restore what the High Court has taken away". Of course it should, but it won't, unless and until the people make the Commonwealth do it.
The so-called non-socialist politicians (Libs and Nats, and some Chippocrats) will be scared stiff of reversing the effects of recent High Court rulings (Koowarta, Franklin Dam) as such would throw them into an anti-United Nations stance: They know they could be cut to pieces by the mass media, slavishly devoted to the U.N. and its works. What politician will stand out against the United Nations? Once again, only enough individuals who know what to do, and how to do it, can have any hope at all of stemming the centralist flood now engulfing us.
The Sun (Melbourne), August 8th, reports that a 'Financial adviser", Dr. Merv. Lincoln claims that the Government's compromise on superannuation tax was a "victory for the ordinary worker". Let us take a look at this "victory". A worker who retires at the age of 55 and over on $50,000 will now pay $7,500 tax, whereas previously he would have paid $2,500, hence he now pays an extra $5,000 in tax. This is the "victory" for the ordinary worker. What do those universities do to people when they get hold of them? We doubt very much if Dr. Lincoln would be worried about the availability of his next meal.
The "grey eminences" of the world's movie
industries are at it again. We have only just seen the much-advertised
movie - "Heat and Dust". It is an excellent production:
acting of a high standard; excellent photography; background
music to fit like a glove onto the various moods of the story
and the scenery; period reproduction(s) clothing, speech,
manners, etc., etc., clear and accurate. All very fine indeed.
BUT, the movie is, like "Ghandi", an attack on the British
in India. The book on which the film is based, was written,
we understand, by a Jewish, Polish woman who is married to
an Indian. There are two inter-twined plots running throughout:
the plot set in the thirties has the beautiful young English
wife of a junior British Indian civil servant having an "affair"
with an Indian Nawob (Prince), falling pregnant, and the ensuing
scandal and drama. The other story line has a most attractive
descendent of this girl (Julie Christie) having an affair,
all casual, with an educated Indian, falling pregnant, visiting
the scene of her ancestor's retirement from the world after
her scandal, where she decides to, quite joyously, have her
baby. Film ends.
Senate Should Uphold the Constitution
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|