THE MEGABANKS AND THE NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER

"The entry of sixteen foreign banks is a triumph for Paul Keating - and a breathtaking somersault by him". - Michelle Grattan, in The Age (Melbourne) February 28th

There has been so much distilled waffle being talked about the entry into Australia of the foreign Megabanks that the mind of the ordinary citizen must be numbed. Perhaps this is what is desired! Generally, the editorials of the metropolitan dailies are ecstatic that we are at the dawn of a golden future ("golden" not used to denote our mesmerisation by the mystical qualities of gold in modern day finance economics). Many see Paul Keating, who won some overseas prize for economic performance, and then was witness to the incredible slump of the Australian dollar - as the Whizz Kid of finance economics who will put Australia up there with the Big League: really Trilateralist, Club of Rome stuff.

Once again we must deflate the Hollywood balloon. Yes prophets have no honour in their own land. We are reminded of the story of the Fathers of ancient Rome who were warned by messengers of the approach of Barbarians. What happened? Oh no, they didn't take steps to defend the City they put the messengers to death! The barbarians marched onwards and sacked Rome.

The big advantage that Australia will derive from the Megabanks so we are told is competition that, apparently, will benefit everyone. This remains to be seen. What Mr. & Mrs. Australia want to see will be lower interest rates on their borrowings particularly on home loans and mortgages. Will they see this? Most unlikely; for example, the Megabanks will not be geared to government fiscal controls, say, on home loans.
But the Megabanks are really not concerned with what is now called "retail banking"; that is, the small, everyday transactions with members of the public, viz, home loans, personal loans, overdraft facilities for small businesses, etc. The Megabanks are primarily concerned with "wholesale banking", the big stuff!

Those millions to the mining corporations; those tens of millions for oil and mineral exploitation. For example, the Bank of Tokyo could be expected to be very much concerned with the flow of essential raw materials from Australia to Japan; and the supply of finance to Australian manufacturers and traders for the purchase of tens of millions of dollars worth of Japanese goods and services. The Deutsche Bank of Germany will, similarly, be eager to provide those millions for the flow of German goods and services into Australia. We wonder if anyone has yet asked what effect this will have on our native, Australian, industries. Well, they are to be phased out as per New International Economic Order.

Under the United Nations UNCTAD programme, to which Australia is a signatory and has already given ratification, the "Integrated Programme for Commodities" for International control over production, pricing, and distribution of the world's foodstuffs, fibers, and minerals is already being established. We can be sure that one Megabank viz, the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, will be most interested in the movement of Australian fibres, minerals, and foodstuffs to China, and with its trading and commercial connections and contacts, it will carry out this task more efficiently than the local Australian banks.

Mr. Paul Keating is right here, but Mr. Keating did not talk along these lines when in Opposition. He wrote: "Foreign banks would 'inevitably' push up interest rates. They would concentrate on wholesale banking (which will be the case...O.T.) placing enormous pressure on Australian banks to substantially re-orientate their activities away from retail banking. They would increase the pressure for deregulation. "As to the argument that foreign bank entry will increasingly link Australia to the general instability in the international banking system, and lessen a Federal Government's control over domestic monetary policy, there is no doubt that this must be the case. That was Paul Keating in February 1983 in The Age (Melbourne).

Michelle Grattan dryly observes that - "But then, politics is all about standing on your head, without your face going red'. It is as obvious as it can be to us that Paul Keating has, himself, been taken up into a high mountain, and shown all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time".

Whose servant is Paul Keating NOW?? He is serving an ideology; that of Socialist One Worldism. Yes, but whose POLICY is One Worldism? We can do no better than quote from "Centralisation, The Policy of Satanism", by L.D.Byrne: "The policy of centralisation of power is the denial of the right of men and women to freedom. It is the denial of the sanctity of human personality. It is a denial of the omnipotence of God and the antithesis of the social policy inherent in Christ's teachings".

The New International Economic Order is a plan; rather a plot, to centralise the resources of the nations of the world, and then the peoples of the world. The Megabanks in Australia are but a tool to carry out this policy more efficiently.

BRIEF COMMENTS

We have all heard about this "affirmative action", which is, tearing away the waffle, discrimination in reverse. All manner of anomalies will arise as this absurd programme is pushed by the Socialists/Humanists in Canberra and the State Capitals. Now the tertiary institutions ("journalese" for universities and technical colleges) are watching the penny tumble. The Humanist Equalisers want a certain percentage of women and ethnics to occupy staff positions at the above with less regard to academic qualifications, For example, traditionally, a doctorate (Ph.D.) in a dicipline has been a required qualification for a teaching position in tertiary institutions; but equal opportunity boffins would claim that, for a variety of reasons, there are far less Ph.Ds. among women than men. The universities and technical colleges will probably "get around" this silly obstruction in their own ways, but the issue will cause some bitterness and rancour amongst academics, generally not noted for plethoric commonsense.

Whilst on the subject, Deakin University (Geelong, Victoria) has recently published "Girls, School and Work", which laments the fact that, in spite of Women's Lib., Gay Liberation, and all the rest of the liberations, girls were still not entering "non-traditional" work areas, and furthermore, they still make ill-advised subject choices. We are not told just who considers these subjects "ill-advised", of course. Certainly not the girls, themselves. The "Affirmative action" Redfems are trying to turn women into men. Women have the same intelligence and abilities as men, but they are biologically different. Not as many of them are interested in being mechanical experts or professionals. A woman is by nature interested in clothes (fashion), children, the home, furniture. Most of them don't want to be Ph.Ds in some stuffy university!
Listen to Dorah Watts in "Chattels of the Modern World": "… unpaid women charity workers are regarded as dull women fussing over trivial matters; but if women can get well paid jobs as organisers or such of charities run on business lines, that meets with approval. It is represented as drudgery for a woman to look after her children; but an honoured career for her to be paid to look after other women's children, provided it be outside the home in creches or nursery schools or kindergartens. Housework, it is averred, deadens the mind, and soul by its monotony; but being paid to type matter, that has small or no interest to the woman, the live long day, or to perform some near mechanical, repetitious task in a factory or workshop, is declared to emancipate a female. Any paid work outside the home is, in the eyes of the anti-woman feminist (Radfem) is preferable to the labour performed for love of home and husband and children, or even of fellow man". The home is what the Radfems hate: they must destroy that home.

The madness rolls on. In New Zealand, where the madness appears to be worse than even in Australia, two Shakespearean plays have been banned from Victoria University's English Club Shakespeare film festival. "The Merchant of Venice" has been dubbed "anti-semitic", and "The Taming of the Shrew" has been dubbed "sexist". Fortunately, there have been several prominent people, e.g. the director of a New Zealand drama school; artistic director of Wellington theatre, who have protested at such idiocy.

There's nothing like having your hands on the levers of political power, and splashing around the contents of the public purse. The Federal Government has already spent $19 MILLION on the original Assets Test, which was scrapped! The Government trained 5,355 staff to implement the original Assets Test before it was abandoned. But wait for it, the new Assets Test has already cost $21 MILLION. So at least $40 MILLION has been spent before the assets Test even begins to operate, and will have nothing like that amount of revenue each year. Quite obviously, the Assets Test is intended to be extended as far as possible (squeeze, squeeze, squeeze) once it has been introduced and accepted. Very many citizens, with a few dollars put aside for a rainy day, in cash, property, land, are in for the shock of their lives when the Assets Test is turned "on".

DETRACTORS ARE ILL-INFORMED ON NUCLEAR POWER

VICTORIAN MLA SPEAKS OUT ON ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS