Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Home Blog Freedom Potentials The Cross Roads Veritas Books
OnTarget Archives Newtimes Survey Podcast Library Video Library PDF Library
Actionist Corner YouTube Video Channel BitChute Video Channel Brighteon Video Channel Social Credit Library

On Target

30 May 1986. Thought for the Week: "It now seems unfortunate that people from Europe were encouraged to migrate to Australia in such numbers when there was adequate work for them to do in the reconstruction of European cities. In their place, workers from previously colonial areas were employed, these people preferred migrating to Europe and Britain rather than remain in their own countries under their own national rulers. Germany, France, Canada and Britain now have a 'colour problem'. To meet this new situation new laws have been devised, not to keep immigrants out, but to stifle any opposition to the developing social strife. The UN is foremost in advocating programmes to oppose the new 'racist' attitude."
Dr. J.C.A. Dique, in Immigration - The Quiet Invasion. (1985)


"The Federal Treasurer, Mr. Keating, today is expected to stand firm on the proposed fringe benefits tax on company cars in the face of strong opposition from leading Labor Party figures, business leaders and the Australian Democrats". - The Australian, May 26th.

What the Hawke Government has now to do; and any Commonwealth government in Australia must also do (including a government led by Mr. John Howard), is to scrape the very bottom of the national tax barrel for moneys to fund the escalating overseas debt, the Social Security Frankenstein, and other tax eating monsters. What seems to escape the economic pundits when pontificating upon the worsening state of the economy is that quite simply, the more moneys that are ripped off taxpayers by way of various official imposts are moneys that will not be spent by Australians on goods and services.
Treasurers (not only Mr. Keating, whose star is setting!) are given to "vain imaginings": they are confident they can fleece the taxpayer, and then whip him into working harder and spending more. The many millions locked away in savings deposit in Australia are a worry; if only these deposit holders would have confidence and spend these millions into circulation, the economy graph would show a surge upwards. Australians seem to be doing this anyway, as bank deposits are falling.

Certainly, people in Australia don't have great confidence in the economy, but they are being forced to spend some of their deposits (if they are lucky enough to have bank deposits) just in order to live from week to week. Any housewife knows well that prices are continually increasing - from her weekly forays into the supermarkets. A large jar of yeast extract or peanut butter, which may last a family 2-3 months, will show a marked price increase over the period; not just one or two cents. If the Australian Democrats don't play ball with Mr. Keating, then Mr. Hawke may be forced into a double dissolution "to get rid of them". In spite of the bravado of Senator Chipp, we think that his Party could lose much electoral support in the event of a double dissolution of the Commonwealth Parliament because of the new proportional representation quotas, which will apply to the filling of the Senate positions. The Democrats would have actually to improve their performance to hold their present strength. We doubt that they could do that. Their demise, in such an event, is probable. It's all a considerable electoral risk, but Mr. Hawke is a punter (he loves the Turf) - and he might have a go.

We agree with Dr. Katherine West that the Bill of Rights issue is a political "sleeper" which could be "activated to haunt the Government. Indeed, general opposition to it is mounting. We observe now that the Bishops of the Catholic Church in Australia are firming considerably, in their opposition to the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights issue will also react against the Democrats. Let us always remember that Senator Janine Haines said that her complaint against the Bill of Rights is that it doesn't go far enough. She could well remember this for the rest of her life, herself!


by Neil G. McDonald
"Recently, our first grandson was born. "Within a day, he was showered with appreciation, birthday cards, clothing, and toys for the next awakening months. Out of proportion to his birth-weight of 6 pounds and ten ounces was his share of the National Debt, which, legally, he will have to carry. Figure wizards, unable to stop the merry-go-round, estimate that Australia is $78 billion 'in the red'. "That works out at $20,000 for each family. Little Lachlan's slumbering shoulders will have to bear one third of this burden just for a start. Then, like a weight lifter, his load will increase as borrowing and interest puts Australia into the pawnshop of hidden wheelers and dealers.

"Australia, 'the Lucky Country', is physically embarrassed with abundance. Despite 'go slows', strikes, and quotas, there is no shortage of anything except the financial symbols which reflect prices and purchasing power. "Instead of being in a 'seventh heaven', Australia is declining into a seventh hell: seventh on the list of nations with the world's highest foreign debts. Australia is worse off than Algeria, Indonesia, and the much-maligned South Africa.... and almost on the low level of the Soviet Union. In three years our debt has doubled. With payment impossible, due to heavy interest added to borrowings; baby Lachlan will owe at least $15,000 by his third birthday. "Blessed with slumber, he faces the future with optimism - unaware that he could be personally liable for $200,000 on his 21st birthday.

"No schoolteacher is likely to explain why the interest bill increases more rapidly than the foreign debt itself. But orthodox economists explain that Australia must export or perish. Little Lachlan will never become a Rhodes scholar if he questions why prosperity depends upon exporting more products than are imported. The 'wizards' will allay his fears.... 'The overall level of debt is not important ... capacity is our vital need. "Will Lachlan and his generation have the capacity to pay during his lifetime? "No way ... for payment would require a miracle, and would then release them from the financial chains which fetter their freedom.

"Children of the next generation will incur personal debts with future purchases of motorcars and houses. These products will have been produced with available materials and payment of wages. Yet, the final payment is pushed into the future. If default occurs, the item of purchase is surrendered or the bailiffs called in. "What will happen when Australia eventually runs out of credit? Lachlan and his ambitious young hopefuls will find that compulsory taxation installments will rise from one quarter to one third of income; and then to one half. Indirect taxation will remove any surplus.

"Unless their concern and curiosity have not been dulled by a confetti of distractions video, drugs, and other modes of escapism - they will succumb like the frogs which allow water to come to the boil slowly, instead of taking immediate evasive action. "Challenge to perpetual debt bondage will not come from any of Australia's political parties. It will require one or more unique individuals to by-pass standard schooling and analyse the reasons why abundance cannot be distributed without impossible debt. "Hopefully, somewhere, gathering strength in the comfort of cradle or cot is a prophet in the mould of C.H. Douglas, the Scottish engineer who detonated the bomb of external debt with the truth that everything physically possible must be made financially possible."


The battle concerning the Victorian Cain government's programme for Municipal Council amalgamations is swinging against the Government, with Mr. Stuart Morris, Chairman of the Local Government Commission, now conceding that ratepayers could have a say by way of referenda. The Bendigo Advertiser of May 1st quotes Mr. Morris as having said in answer to questions that residents of areas recommended for restructure by the local Government Commission will be able to demand a referendum on the proposal if the vote was overwhelmingly against the proposal. I have no doubt that politicians, being politicians, would take note of the result and not proceed", he said. He instanced what had happened at Traralgon, where a referendum had shown residents of the city and shire were strongly against a proposal for their amalgamation and that no action had been taken since to bring about a change.

While Mr. Morris admission is interesting, we strike a note of caution. Following the Traralgon vote, Minister for Local Government Simmonds said that it was irrelevant. Mr. Norris says that the Commissions proposals would provide for "new municipalities", and that a demand for a referendum would have to be made by at least 10 percent of the residents of the new area. Socialist Simmonds had hoped that in the poll he ordered for Traralgon, the much bigger City vote would swamp the smaller Shire vote in favour of amalgamation, one of the enticements being that this would reduce rate increases, the Shire having much lower rates than the city. But sufficient City voters "saw through" the Government's trickery.


Business Review Weekly (Feb 28 1986) devoted its feature article to the world-wide crisis in agriculture. "The worst is yet to come and there is very little that governments can do about it," it said: On the Beef front it went on: "... The European Commission's most recent projection of the exportable beef surplus in 1991 is ... 200,000 tonnes. The Bureau of Agricultural Economics says it seems "extremely conservative." Its view is that the figure could be more like 500,000 to one million tonnes, which was the Commissions projection before the introduction of milk production quotas in 1984…

Of dairy surpluses it said: "... Huge stocks held by EEC and US authorities are expected to dominate the international market for dairy products throughout the 1980s, even though both have introduced measures to reduce milk production ... EEC exports of main dairy products have more than doubled since the early 1970s, accounting for almost the entire growth of world market sales. Even so, the "butter mountain" peaked at 1.2 million tonnes 15 months ago ... The situation prompted huge sales at giveaway prices to Middle East countries and the Soviet Union in contravention of the minimum prices contained in the International Dairy Arrangement ... Though slightly embarrassed at the resulting fuss, the EEC claimed that because the product was more than a year and a half old, it could no longer be regarded as "butter". It obtained an 18 month exemption ... allowing it to sell butter at prices below the agreed minimum of $1000 a tonne..."

The article went on to say that Australia had only been able to retain its wheat market in Egypt by offering Egyptian students free university scholarships, and building three huge wheat silos (90,000 tonne capacity) free for the Egyptians. It pointed out that the U.S. currently has a stockpile of 48 million tonnes of wheat, equivalent to about three years' production in Australia.


by David Thompson
We do not carry any brief for The Bulletin, especially since that magazine's campaign for a new Australian Flag, but occasionally it does "ring the alarm bells" on important issues. The edition of April 15th carried a useful article, "Labor's Secret Revolution", by David Barnett, who claims that the Hawke Government has donned conservative cloak to cover its movements in bringing about a social revolution. On Target readers will have been aware of this from the word 'go'! On the Bill of Rights, Barnett has this to say: "The government is using foreign affairs powers under the constitution to adhere to international conventions which extend the power of the Commonwealth at the expense of state rights. Why does a country whose citizens exercise greater political rights than all others in the world, need the Bill of Rights? The answer is: to take away rights that already exist at common law and as a backdoor method of over riding the constitution to secure amendments that would not be carried at a referendum..the major force of the Bill in serving the Hawke government's constitutional purposes will be its use in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, whose powers are being increased in associated legislation. The Human Rights Commission will become a star chamber, with the roles of both prosecutor and judge. "The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to effect the re allocation of power within the federal constitution, strengthening both the central government and the institutions which are developing as part of the new corporate state..."

Mr. Justice Fullager has warned that the erosion of common law protection sounds the death-knell for our traditional liberties (see O.T. April 24th) and The Bulletin, once known as "the bushman's Bible confirms it. The Bill of Rights must go!


This article is taken from WAKE UP (U.K.). This is not, repeat, not connected in any way with the journal "Wake UP" (Australia) published from time to time by the Council for a Free Australia. We think that Dr. Fred Schwarz has hit the nail on the head. The article runs:

"The Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, is obsessed with the U.S. Strategic Defence Initiative (S.D.I.), which is commonly but inaccurately known as 'Star Wars'. Why is this? How does it increase the existing danger of the abundance of powerful nuclear weapons in the U.S.A. and the Soviet Union? Dr. Fred Schwarz recently set out the reason for the Soviet obsessive objection to S.D.I. as follows: "'The Soviet antagonism to S.D.I. is entirely rational. It poses no threat to the Soviet Union, but it does present a deadly threat to the Soviet plan to conquer the U.S.A.

"Marxism-Leninism teaches that the ultimate triumph of Communism over the entire world is inevitable. It also teaches that the leaders of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union have the historic responsibility of directing the Communist campaigns, which will result in world conquest. The strategy they are using to achieve world conquest is called 'Peaceful Coexistence'. The success of this strategy requires the utilisation of nuclear blackmail rather than nuclear war. "The most important act in the drama of world conquest is the conquest of the U.S.A. This is to be achieved by following the formula: 'External encirclement, plus internal demoralisation, plus thermonuclear blackmail, lead to progressive surrender'.

'As the encirclement of the U.S.A. increases, numerous situations will undoubtedly arise which demand resolute action by the U.S.A. What should the U.S.A. do in one or all of the following circumstances?
(1) South Africa installs a Communist government which is dominated by the Soviet Union;
(2) A Communist government is installed in the Philippines and the naval and air bases of that country are utilised by the Soviet Union;
(3) A Communist coup leads to Soviet control of the oil in the Middle East;
(4) Mexico is conquered by the Communists and the flood of illegal immigrants into the U.S.A. is increased ten-fold.

"'In each case the Communist leaders are counting upon the U.S.A. being paralysed by the fear of taking steps which may lead to a nuclear war. To assure this, the threat of nuclear war must be credible. There must be no way by which the U.S.A. can defend itself from nuclear war. This is the situation, which exists at present while the national security depends upon Mutual Assured Destruction (M.A.D.) "This situation would change dramatically if an effective defence against nuclear weapons proves to be possible.

The research phase of S.D.I. is directed to determining whether it is possible or not if effective means of defence against nuclear weapons can be discovered and applied, mankind should rejoice. This rejoicing would exclude the fanatical Communist leaders with their Marxist Leninist delusions. To them S.D.I. represents a threat to the fulfillment of their historic destiny for this reason their resources must be rallied to prevent all research activities, which might lead to the success of S.D.I… 'Surely it is preferable to find a way to destroy missiles in flight than to live under the threat of imminent destruction. Yet, this is what Gorbachov fears, and he is marshalling his resources to prevent it.'"


David Thomson sends these additional comments
As the madness of central planning by "experts" beings to strangle the Australian social order, it is notable that it is almost always accompanied by the alienation of individual sovereignty. In Victoria, the planning idealists seek to amalgamate local councils with complete disregard for the effects of further centralisation of power. The Land Claims issue, still being pursued in a more stealthy manner, personifies the craziness of ideological dreamers, again with complete disregard for its effects on Aboriginal people. In other areas, like education, Defence and the Bill of Rights; personal sovereignty and individual choice are being sacrificed on the altar of central planning. And now, in Australia's most recent rural crisis, the academic experts are insisting that the realities of rural life must be subservient to the abstract.


The carnage and the casualties in rural Western Australia, as a long-term result of Keynesian financial policies, have to be seen to be properly appreciated. The rash of mortgagee sales, and farmers simply walking off their properties since last Christmas, is nothing compared to the rural depopulation time bomb that could explode next year. "As many as 20% of W.A. wheat-growers are taking a last desperate all-or-nothing gamble on a bumper 1986 season. Even if the gamble comes off, survival is still not assured. All that is assured is another chance at a similar gamble the following year; such are the massive debts, interest rates, and cost hikes. And yet, in the face of such rural carnage, Dr. Henry Schapper, agricultural economist, remains unsympathetic. Addressing the Rural Press Club of Perth last April, he accused farm lobby groups of encouraging the degeneration of rational government rural policy making into political pork barreling.


As long ago as May, 1985, Brad Collis, reporting for "The National Farmer", wrote an article headed "How the 'Get Big' Rule Backfired in the West". Collis began:
"Many of Western Australia's most progressive farmers those that took hold of the "get-big-or-get-out" advice ten years ago and worked to expand their operations - are in trouble. And no one, not even their own farmer organisations, seem to care..."

Even though 80,000 farmers left agriculture in the last 15 years as a result of policies that he defended, is Dr. Schapper repentant? Not a bit! What policies does he have to offer? Only more of the same; economic rationalisation; or agricultural "adjustment". That is, there are still too many farmers, and more yet must disappear to make way for even more efficient producers.


Schapper claims that farmers are already getting a "fair go" economically. "But I believe what the farm lobby wants is a better deal. A fair go for everybody in our society is a right and proper expectation and a realistically possible achievement. A better deal for all may be neither possible nor desirable..." The reality is, of course, that such is the productive ability of our primary producers, that a better deal, in real terms, is easily possible.
© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159