|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
18 March 1983. Thought for the Week: "There is not much difference between the basic economic techniques of Socialism and Naziism"
Chief speaker at the Fabian International Bureau's Conference on March 15th, 1942
PRIME MINISTER HAWKE'S FASCIST PROGRAMME
Prime Minister Bob Hawke says that his "Summit" Conference starting on April 11th will provide "an historic opportunity to set a new course for Australia". Mr. Hawke is correct in the sense that what he is proposing is the open abolition of representative responsible parliamentary government.
During the latter stages of the election campaign former Liberal Minister for Defence Sir James Killen said that the Labor Party's accord with the Trade Union movement on a prices and income policy was a serious threat to the Westminster type of government, in that the government of the day could not legislate in certain areas without the agreement of a non-parliamentary organisation. What Sir James had to say was true as far as it went. But we point out that in the words of a distinguished Australian Sir Marcus Oliphant former Governor of South Australia that representative government in Australia has been replaced by an "elected dictatorship". And that dictatorship has been subservient to an even worse dictatorship that of Finance.
Sir James will recall how as Minister for Defence he pleaded that military defence had to be subordinated to the "fight" against inflation. As we have consistently pointed out that "fight" is doomed unless the treacherous policies of debt finance are tackled. As Federal Treasurer Mr. John Howard capitulated to the non-elected Reserve Bank bureaucrats, but Mr. Hawke now proposes to take the process of government by non-parliamentary organisation much further.
As the new Prime Minister has constantly
made reference to his expertise in the field of economics,
we would have thought that Mr. Hawke knows what is the basic
cause of the deepening economic crisis and the policies necessary
to start removing that cause. If his Big Business friends
like Sir Peter Abeles also know the answers then why is a
"Summit" Conference necessary? The "Summit" will in fact be
a skilful public relations exercise designed to claim a "consensus"
support for a programme which Mr. Hawke is determined to try
to impose upon the Australian people.
As a declared supporter of "democratic
socialism" from way back, Mr. Hawke is familiar with the view
of the better informed Socialists that so far from Big Business
being antipathetic to Socialism, the bigger Big Business grows
the more it becomes collectivist. Mr. Hawke's many big Business
friends clearly have no fear of Mr. Hawke's "democratic socialism"
or his support for a Socialist Republic Australia. Mr. Hawke
has already made it clear that he is not going to challenge
As we have constantly pointed out; unless foreign financial capital is required to import equipment or technology; it is unnecessary for the development of Australian productive capacity. The rest of the world could sink beneath the sea tomorrow without in any way affecting Australia's real credit, its productive capacity. While devaluation gives a short-term benefit to exporters; it means that nationally a nation has to export more production for the same amount of imports. It is an inflationary policy as Mr. Hawke will discover.
Those international speculators who shifted credits out of Australia before devaluation made a nice "killing" of 10%. It would be interesting to know the identity of those who sent credits out in such a big way before Mr. Hawke's devaluation. Already Mr. Hawke is shifting his position with comparatively few people recalling how their Prime Minister is manipulating the podia to disguise what he is doing. Aided by the disclosure that the Liberals had seriously underestimated the Budget deficit; Mr. Hawke has been able to start preparing electors for the reality that those firm election promises he did make will now have to be postponed. He has done this in such a way that like his devaluation move he can present himself as "responsible".
Perhaps his major policy shift is the announcement that the "wage pause" may have to stay until the end of the year. An endorsement of the same policy accepted by the Fraser Government. With no prospect of inflation even being reduced. This means a further erosion of consumer purchasing power with serious effects for industry.
In announcing his continuation of the, "wage pause", Mr. Hawke attempted to neutralise any possible criticism by claiming that he had been making this claim right throughout the election campaign. There is no record of Mr. Hawke having said any such thing during the election campaign. Just as the crisis produced by the Fraser Government paved the way for the Hawke election victory. Now Mr. Hawke is seeking to exploit that crisis to advance his grand design through the, "Summit". The essence of what Mr. Hawke is proposing has a disturbing similarity to the Fascist Corporate State concepts of Mussolini who replaced what representative government the Italians had with government by councils allegedly representing the different sections of society.
Perhaps it is an indication of the shape of things to come that Mr. Hawke is going to use the very parliamentary chamber where the elected representatives of the people meet to pass legislation, to conduct a "Summit" of non-elected representatives of corporate groups. Electors who voted for Labor Party candidates with the belief, or hope, that a Hawke Government must be an improvement on a Fraser Government, are in for some rude shocks.
THE OPEC DILEMMAMany will recall the two great myths dreamed up a year or two ago; firstly, that the world was running out of oil; and secondly that the world's money crisis was the direct result of huge price rises instituted by the members of OPEC. The evidence that OPEC was pushed into the price rise policy by Western Oil Companies received no publicity. A report in "The Australian" (March 14, 1983) is illuminating: "American intelligence estimates now reveal that OPEC's power is well and truly broken.... Not only cash strapped Nigeria and Indonesia, but Saudi Arabia itself is short of finance.... Intelligence figures show OPEC's combined minimum balance of trade deficit for 1982 was of the order of $17,000 million and for 1983 the shortfall will increase to $25,000 million - an extra burden that will have to be borne by the international financial system. OPEC member nation debt has already reached a staggering level and threatens the political stability of the individual nations..."
With a combined total of financial reserves between OPEC members of $325 billion, the foreign debts of the same members now totals $111 billion. Each member desperately wants to sell more oil, yet every increase in sales threatens to lower prices. The real beneficiaries, whatever happens, are the international bankers...."
THE FARCE OF FOREIGN AIDThe London School of Economics Professor Peter Bauer; one of the few academics courageous enough to challenge the Brandt Report and the New International Economic Order has given further evidence in a recent paper "The Australian" 14/3/83: ".... The impotence of individual donors over the disposition of multinational aid to which they have contributed was graphically brought home in the Falklands war. During this war Britain was obliged to give aid to Argentina because it was a participant in the United Nations development programme. British objections to the continuation of this aid were unavailing. British aid to President Amin of Uganda was gradually run down in the 1970s and was completely eliminated some years before his overthrow. Substantial aid from the European Economic Community, on the other hand, continued to the end of his rule; again in the face of British opposition..."
In view of the fact that if expenditure on tertiary education for foreign students is included, Australia's Foreign Aid total has topped $1,000 million for 1982-83, perhaps it's time to see whether we are getting anything more than revolution for our money.
MR HAWKE, POLITICAL ZIONISM AND THE SOVIET
"The Australian Jewish News", strongly pro-Zionist in its editorial of March 11th is most eloquent concerning the virtues of Australia's new Prime Minister Mr. Bob Hawke. Upon his election Mr. Hawke received a telegram from his friend Mr. Isi Leibler President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry from Jerusalem. Mr. Mark Leibler Victorian State Zionist Council President joined in the eulogies of Mr. Hawke, expressing the hope that Mr. Hawke will usher in "a new era of social and economic progress".
Students of Australian history will be astonished to learn from Mr. Mark Leibler that the late John Curtin "contributed to a forward moving multicultural society through his immigration and ethnic affairs policies". Mr. Mark Leibler presumably has not heard of Labor's Minister for Immigration, Mr. Arthur Caldwell, who stoutly defended Australia's traditional Immigration policy.
Much has been made of Mr. Hawke's visit to Moscow on behalf of Soviet Jews. There is not one iota of evidence to suggest that Mr. Hawke had the slightest effect on the Soviet's policy of letting Jews leave the Soviet in accordance with long-term arrangements between the Soviet and Political Zionism. (This matter is dealt with in Eric D. Butler's "Censored History" $1. posted from all League bookshop). But incidents during Mr. Hawke's 1979 visit to the Soviet leave many vital questions unanswered.
Hawke's official biographer Blanche D'Alpuget reveals the shattered state of Hawke as he flew into Rome from Moscow. Mr. Hawke's friend, Mr. Isi Leibler is quoted as saying that Hawke's emotions were "completely smashed in". Blanche D'Alpuget quotes an Australian diplomat as saying, "Hawke was trapped between two powerful forces - the KGB and international Zionism which in the Russian mind is a huge and powerful adversary". If Mr. Hawke's behaviour in the Soviet Union allowed him to be compromised by the KGB as suggested by some it would perhaps explain his rather muted criticism of the Soviet Union even in spite of his professed concern about the plight of Soviet Jews.
Senate (December 2nd): World Heritage
Properties Protection Bill: Senator Shirley Walters (Lib.-Tas.);
Senator MacGibbon (Lib.-Qld.) World
Heritage Properties Protection Bill (December 2nd):
Senator Missen (Lib.-Vic.):
Senator Shirley Walters (Lib .-Tas.):
Senator Evans (A.L.P.-Vic.) and the new
Attorney General in the Hawke Labor Government:
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|