WHAT ABOUT THAT 'ECONOMIC RECOVERY'?

The Melbourne "Age" of January 4th carried a front-page story under the headline, ECONOMISTS TIP BRIGHT GROWTH YEAR. Written by Mr. Terry McCrann, business editor, the story opened as follows: "Australia's top economic forecasters are unanimous in predicting that the nation's economy will power strongly into recovery in 1984 and end two years of recession and almost unremitting gloom."

The League of Rights has never been listed as a "top economic forecaster", but the record shows that over nearly 40 years the League has been consistently right while many of the economic "experts" have been consistently wrong. No realistic comment on economic affairs is possible without an understanding of how the present finance economic system operates. With that understanding, it can be predicted with complete certainty that there can be no genuine stability. The system can only be sustained by escalating debt. Continuous inflation is mathematically certain while this policy is pursued. Attempts to restrain inflation by restricting the rate of debt creation produce economic and social disasters, these exploited by subversives in all spheres with the ultimate aim of creating a complete collectivist State.

Increased economic activities in Australia are directly related to an increased rate of credit creation, and a small reduction in interest rates for those prepared to increase their debt structure. However, it is instructive to note that small business organisations are not obtaining the benefit of any reductions in interest rates. Loans to large business organisations have dropped to 13 percent, while smaller business organisations face interest rates of 15 percent for loans up to $100,000.

A policy of progressive economic centralisation is being imposed by financial policy. This is being accentuated by big increases and other charges being imposed by State Labor governments in spite of promises by State Labor Premiers Wran, Cain, Bannon and Burke that they would lower or "restrain" State taxes.

Assuming that Australia's record wheat harvest can be sold at a profitable price, increased credit expansion against export earnings will, along with Mr. Hawke's deficit, also help to stimulate the Australian economy. But many wheat growers will not be so pleased as they are now when they eventually receive their taxation assessments. We warn once again that predictions about any type of genuine economic and social stability emerging this year are dangerously misleading.

The experiences of the U.S.A. provide a clear warning for those prepared to heed it. The much-publicised American "recovery" has been the result of the Reagan Administration adopting a financial policy that has generated a record deficit. Now comes the news that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has warned that the American "recovery" might soon start to "evaporate". Federal Reserve Chairman Mr. Paul Volcker expresses his fears about the huge deficit and says that the Government should "put a cap" on its credit supply. With a Presidential election coming up in November this year, there is no way that the Administration is going to halt its current expansionary programme. The consequences of expanding the flood of increasing debt can, hopefully, be masked until after the elections.

Unless there is a basic change in financial policy, we can predict now that 1985 is going to be a major disaster year for the U.S.A., with widespread international implications. But current evidence suggests that already Mr. Volcker is through the Federal Reserve Board moving to clamp down on the credit expansion that has given a temporary stimulus to the American economy and has led many "experts" to claim that the U.S.A. was leading the world out of the depression.

Over the twelve months between July 1982 and July 1983, there was the biggest increase in the U.S.A. money supply since the end of the Second World War. But since the end of July 1983, the rate of money expansion was cut back to a rate equivalent to only 2 percent per annum. This explains the headline, STAGNANT SALES SHOCK ANALYSTS, with a gloomy story of low pre Christmas sales. Dr. Milton Friedman predicts, "We shall be lucky indeed if the economic slow down now in process does not degenerate into a full fledged recession."

In Australia Mr. Bob Hawke is going to have his early election before the harsh realities of finance economic orthodoxy reveal how baseless are the claims of a genuine economic recovery. And of course, while there is no effective Opposition.

BRIEF COMMENTS

Old time Labor supporters must be finding it increasingly difficult to relate to a Labor Party dominated by academics of various types who have turned their backs against traditional Labor policies. One of those policies was support for a restricted immigration policy designed to maintain a homogeneous nation. The new Labor Party has bended to the same international pressure, which changed the immigration policy of the Liberal-National Coalition. Now comes the news that Federal Treasurer Keating supports the granting of licences to foreign banks. Mr. Keating said on January 12th that the Martin Committee, established to review the findings of the Campbell Committee, had recommended that there should be "something like four to six" more licences - both foreign and domestic. The internationalising of the banking system is designed to break down national sovereignties and to pave the way for the World State.

In an article on Attorney General Gareth Evans in "The Australian" of January 14th, Anne Maria quotes an Australian Democrat Senator as saying; "Gareth is always on an ego trip, always trying to score Brownie points. The trouble is he carries his arrogance too far." Senator Evans is a great admirer of Mr. Justice Murphy. Mr. Justice Murphy is the man who said, "I often look at the Hansard records of parliamentary debates, and I must confess I not infrequently find my own contributions, when a member of the Australian Senate, particularly valuable." Evans and Murphy are typical of their kind; their sheer intellectual arrogance masks their shallow philosophical roots.

Those astonished, and alarmed, by President Reagan's marked shift of attitude towards Communist China, should note that China is now the U.S.A.'s third biggest export market, and that the U.S.A. is China's largest investor. Economic co-operation, which in reality means increased U.S.A. economic blood transfusions to Communist China, was the major subject for discussion between President Reagan and visiting Chinese Communist President, Mr. Zhao Ziyang. President Reagan told his Communist guest "We're making available technology that will open new horizons for your country." He is not reported as saying that U.S.A. technology is being made available as a result of the massive credits being extended to Communist China by the International Bankers. The same bankers financed advanced technology for the Soviet Union. This certainly opened up "new horizons" for the Soviet strategists, who have used this technology in their contribution towards establishing the World State. The Chinese Communists endorse the same objective. And while President Reagan is giving increased aid and comfort to the Chinese Communists, they are increasing their persecution of Chinese Catholics who maintain their contact with Rome. The 76-year-old Roman Catholic Bishop of Baoding has been jailed for ten years because of his contacts with the Vatican.

The Muldoon Government in New Zealand is congratulating itself because the inflation rate has dropped to the lowest level for 15 years. But the rate still continues at 3.6 percent, which only a short time ago would have been regarded as disastrous. The lower inflation rate has been obtained by imposing restrictive policies, which have created record unemployment and a trail of business bankruptcies. The 10 months old freeze of wages, prices and dividends cannot be maintained indefinitely without even worse depression conditions, and when removed, as ultimately they will, the inflation rate will inevitably rise again. Before the Muldoon Government came to office, New Zealand had one of the lowest inflation rates in the world, without mass unemployment and large-scale business bankruptcies. This was the result of a policy of consumer price subsidies. This policy is detested by Mr. Muldoon's international banking friends, and whenever a desperate nation requires that its foreign debts be "managed" by the International Monetary Fund, the first condition is that all price subsidies be abolished. A constructive policy for abolishing inflation is outlined in Mr. Eric Butler's "Programme for Reversing Inflation". (Price $1 posted).

RAY OF LIGHT ON IMMIGRATION

As many of our readers may have missed the article by Mr. Des Keegan, writer on National Affairs, in "The Weekend Australian" of January 7-8, which produced the flood of correspondence mentioned above, we are quoting the relevant parts of the article. Mr. Keegan wrote:

"Massive immigration is the stuff of growth and strength and the formula has been tried and found successful in Australia many times: the gold rushes of the 1840s; the rural booms based on merinos, beef, wheat and sugar in the last century; the good times before World War One; and, notably, the quarter century after the mass immigration starting in 1946. "Mass immigration may not be again allowed by the stealthy people we have had in government since about 1967. These people, without mandate, have forced an accelerating program of non-European immigration. It has been imposed from above through muddle and surrender to UN pressure rather than on moral grounds.
"It would be very difficult to expand immigration at present because there is a conspiracy of silence and political cowardice on both sides of the political fence. Each side is frozen without the courage to put the issue to the people. It's all taboo. "It is a tacitly held view that any party professing a preference for non-European immigration would be tossed out on its ear at the next poll. The solution by both sides is to say nothing and leave the electorate without any say in a matter of enormous social significance.
"To expand the immigration policy to an economically sustainable level on the present formula would swamp the country with people with backgrounds different to the northern Europeans who formed the biggest ethnic groups for the past 180 years. "It's all about unifying families of recent refugees. This has big numbers and tidal dimensions. The late Harold Holt widened the selection base in 1967. "Such a marked increase in non-European immigrants would be both immediately obvious, would require our political masters to explain their migration policies, and would unsettle our cohesiveness. All parties have stuck their heads in the sand.
"The main changes were in 1982 when the points system was restructured in favor of intending immigrants with relatives already living in Australia. Our high inflow of refugees and increased numbers from Asia will both dominate and also nominate who will or will not come to Australia. "This means that my clan, continuously in Australia since about 1800, cannot nominate an immigrant because we have no relatives short of some unknown eighth cousins in Scotland, Eire and England. "A war refugee from the Middle East, South America or Afghanistan can begin nominating after five minutes in Australia. "This seems a bit open ended and biased against pioneer stock which has no say while non-European stock has a compounding right of nomination which will, through the extended family, perpetuate non- European immigration. "This may be no bad thing. Yet it is not something that can be done by administrative rules designed solely to make Australia look non-racist to a very racist part of the world. Some ethnic groups coming in substantial numbers are noted for non-assimilation in various parts of Asia and the Pacific.
"Why do we have to prove our racial morality to people with absolutely no intention of hopping into bed with us? Who says we have to take this or that group? Who is going to make us? What is the advantage of creating ethnic enclaves in Australia? What is this nonsense about multiculturalism? The concept can't even be defined and seems bereft of logic.
"A big feature on Australia in the Parisian L'Express last week named Australia Country of the Year and sang a litany of praises for a nation "which is a winner without complexes". "Hang about, you ain't seen nothing yet. You'll see complexes just as they developed in any other racially mixed place. It's on the front page each day. "L'Express noted about a million people a year apply to migrate to Australia each year and that visas were accorded in France only "drop by drop" - 790 for 18,000 requests in 1982. We deny admittance to people with 20 centuries of Greco-Roman civilisation. "Under the arc of fire of thousands of nuclear tipped rockets are millions of British, West Germans, Dutch, Italians, Greeks, Belgians and other easily integrated people applying each year by the hundreds of thousands. Few make it.
"The present system is cast in a mould of self defeat and will turn hostile attention on what is very largely an unpopular imposition of ethnic mixes on a scale not acceptable to the base stock of Australians. Anecdotal evidence suggests at least sullen opposition to these trends. "This, unfortunately, when and if it reaches a politically dangerous point, will simply close the gate against all but a trickle of immigrants. The politicians may opt to throttle the immigration program back to such minimal numbers as will allay community fear of being swamped by non-Europeans. "This would mean fewer Asians, Levantines and South Americans than would be possible under a system which allowed vastly greater scope for Europeans to emigrate en masse to Australia. Surely our points system could embrace our European heritage.
"The present levels of non-Europeans would be much more welcome if accompanied by a couple of hundred thousand Europeans. Would the politicians dare take a poll and ask Australians about this? Probably not; most professional politicians lack guts, integrity and ability to act for the best in a community. Many of them are unable to grasp the issues at stake.
"One would have thought that social cohesiveness, a measure of community and ability to integrate over a generation or two would be a minimum condition demanded of any immigration program. We have probably had the opposite imposed on us by God-knows-who. "To recognise this obvious fact is to be slurred racist. O.K. But that still doesn't alter the facts behind our immigration.
One hesitates to legitimise immigration with the title "program or a policy" ... it is a mish-mash of nonsense tailored to please everyone but the bulk of Australians. "It is also a "little Australia" concept designed to kill off large scale immigration to allay fears our European stock holds about the threat of being eventually swamped as soon as the thin edge of the Asian wedge can be activated.
"Well, as I said at the start, we could get a new aircraft carrier and a lot of other benefits from population growth if we lifted our net migration to about 2 percent. That's a forlorn hope because the migration program will probably collapse if we persist in giving so much control of our intake to family reunion. "My mother came from a family of English Daniels, Scottish Stuarts and Irish Galvins and my father's great grandparents once saw the skies over Ireland. Toss in a dash of Welsh, German and Italian and you have an approximate list of Australian stock expressly forbidden to vote on migration.
"Nominations to emigrate to Australia are now largely reserved for refugees from Lebanon's ethno-religious civil war, South America's ideological civil wars, Vietnam's imperialistic adventures and people on the run from totalitarian States and places incapable of civilised behavior.
"Can you see this enduring against the popular will? Does the issue need a referendum? Should Australia's long run interest in large-scale immigration be sabotaged by a present unpopular and unbalanced program? Will nobody ask mainstream Australia about its attitudes?
"Must away now to don my tin hat and flack jacket before retiring to my bomb and slander proof bunker. After all, the custodians of morality get outraged if you discuss what 97 percent of the community is worried sick about."