YESTERDAY'S MEN IN POLITICAL QUICKSANDS

"Instead of acting on its practical opportunity to recruit essential new talent, the Liberal Party has closed ranks behind yesterday's men...." - Katherine West, in The Weekend Australian, May 23-23.

Yesterday's men. We recall that Prime Minister Hawke used this most derogatory phrase to belittle many of the old "Fraser Gang" shortly after he assumed office in March 1983. We always were of the opinion that Malcolm Fraser never all that bright - in our estimation, would misjudge the timing of a Federal election and "come a cropper". He did. We often, in these pages, point out the dangerous temptation to which many politicians are prone (if not most politicians) - viz, belief in their own propaganda. Well, many of "yesterday's men" at the time of March 1983, could see only a blank wall ahead of them for perhaps two Commonwealth Parliamentary terms, and took their "golden handshake". Some of the dear departed (politically speaking) were Big Mal, himself, Tony Street, Peter Nixon, Doug Anthony, Jim Killen. Mr. Killen, rumour has it, is sniffing the wind in Queensland for a return to State politics. - This would surprise us.

The cunning Mr. Hawke is thoroughly enjoying the Liberals' distress, as he tosses off indication after indication, of an early Federal election. Each time he does this, the Liberal Party machine must crunch into another gear like the clapped out jalopy it is. Dr. West suggests that the Liberals' greatest problem is a 'credibility gap': she means by that that those remaining Liberals of the Malcolm Fraser era accomplished little at the time; so what can they do now? They had their chance!

The obvious answer is new blood. Dr. West thinks that the New Right personalities should be given a run. She thinks that men like John Elliott, Ian McLachlan, John Leard, Jay Pendarvis, Ben Lexcen, Dick Smith, etc., etc., would win seats for the Liberals. We commented on this sort of situation in these pages many months ago- last year in fact. We cannot agree that a string of "New Faces" is going to change anything much at all. We don't want New Faces we want New Policies. We won't get these from the above New Faces: they, almost to a man, represent - not new policies - but the same old Big Finance. They have the powerful backing of the Big Banks.

Mr. Robert Holmes a Court told a meeting of shareholders of his Bell Group recently, in Perth (we saw him, and we heard him!) that he can attract the backing of the Megabanks to the tune of 10 billion dollars. How otherwise do men like Mr. Rupert Murdock, gobble up one newspaper, along with its "satellites" (journals, magazines) after another.

The World Money Power likes it (relative handful of multimillionaires; they are necessary at this stage of Western finance economics in the gradual transition from Capitalism to World Socialism; The process has been termed - "fattening the goose" i.e. both. allowing and encouraging the Murdochs, Elliotts, Holmes a Courts, and their ilk, to concentrate ownership of multinational industrial enterprises in fewer and fewer hands - prior to State control via State socialisation or Communist revolution. True, privatisation is generally the reverse of this (as Margaret Thatcher is attempting in Britain) - but overall, the process of industrial centralisation is the way the "tide" is going.

Now we can repeat; what will these types of men do to stimulate small business, the family farm, our rural industries, etc.? How will they slow down the drift to the cities from the country districts; the decline of Australian urban and rural industries? They represent the power of Big Finance; otherwise they would not have its backing. All would be in favour of the New International Economic Order, which would eventually reduce Australia to a quarry for the (new) industrial giants of Asia.

We can see the shape of things to come in the B.H.P. television commercials, which are meant to fill us with pride as we watch millions of tons of Australia's real wealth (mineral ores, etc.) pour into gigantic ocean going vessels for transshipment to the giant mills of Asia. Asia is taking our real wealth; we, here, are getting some figures in the retrieval systems of the megabanks. Watching such junk, it is intended that we swell with pride. Professor R.F. Irvine, were he still alive, would tell us that we are but victims of the Midas Delusion.

So, again, what's the price of eggs? The price of eggs is that we have to save ourselves from the accelerating rush into totalitarianism, via the Fabian Socialists. "Socialism has nowhere to go but Communism"- or some sort of revolutionary situation - which could lead to the same destination.

Outlook? Not bright at all. Yes, the Senate is our immediate hope for our protection from totalitarian legislation, and for (hopeful) political regeneration along lines, which favour the individual citizen. Dr. West suggests, "The electoral climate has never been so strongly in favour of voting for policies and people, rather than parties". This is probably right. What the League of Rights wants to see is-say, a dozen sound men and women senators with strong patriotic, decentralist, pro-individual views; who will block, the Mickey Mouse legislation and other poisons oozing out of the United Nations, and legislated upon by brainwashed Fabian Socialists. This is the message we have to get across before Brother Hawke does have his election.

There is now no Opposition to counter the Fabian crowd: the immediate task, again, is for us to strengthen that Senate until we can foster some regeneration in the Lower House - and that's going to take time, which, in the short term is against us. In the long term, at the international level, time is on our side, if we can survive the assaults of the Fabians. We think we can.

Note
The National Director has just reported from northern N.S.W. that the National Party has launched another attack by smearing on the League of Rights, using poor old Ken Gott's frayed materials. More details shortly.

THE R.F. IRVINE SOCIETY

The Left wing of the Victorian "Labor" Party has formed the R.F. Irvine Society, firstly to honour the late Professor R.F. Irvine, and secondly, we presume to advance the views of the Socialist Left (read Communist). We gather that this new "Society" will be educative; a sort of counter to the "H.R. Nicholls" Society of the New Right. But what the Labor Left members don't realise is that the late Professor R.F. Irvine became a strong advocate of the financial proposals of C.H. Douglas, the founder of ever-growing body of knowledge which has come to be known as Social Credit. We do not claim that R.F. Irvine was a Social Crediter; he wasn't - he espoused the financial proposals of Social Credit, a very small compartment of the huge subject, which is another story.

An academic contacted us recently to comment on what he called the "delicious irony" of having Left-wing politicians honouring an academic who embraced finance economic views which are the very bane of International Communism. We have previously reported the remark of Comrade Molotov (in 1936) to the effect that "Social Credit" is the "one and only thing we fear". He made that remark to the "Red Dean" of Canterbury, the late Dr. Hewlett Johnson. The Victorian Socialist Left lads know nothing of this, of course. They have "honoured" R.F. Irvine because of his advocacy of the Basic Wage concept. As a matter of interest, this was opposed by the late Professor Douglas Copeland of Melbourne University who was a fierce critic of C .H Douglas.

One of our prized possessions is an autographed copy of The Midas Delusion, by Professor R.F. Irvine, which was published in Adelaide (privately) for the author in 1933, by The Hassell Press. Chapter 18, the last chapter in The Midas Delusion leaves no doubt in the mind of the reader that Irvine was convinced that the C .H. Douglas financial proposals are correct. He (Irvine) advocated a National Credit Council, or authority, and he wrote:
"…But the most important object of the mechanism is to ensure that consumer purchasing power shall always be sufficient to keep pace with production, without resort to a falling general price level (emphasis in original). Such a mechanism (of which the Douglas Plan is only a first draft) is a technical problem involving no more difficulty than hundreds of problems already solved by scientific intelligence in the realm of industry. "What is required ... is a mechanism of distribution which will constantly advance the material well being of the people generally, and call forth a constantly increasing per capita volume of production, a volume commensurate with the marvelous progress of the arts, and this mechanism will, I believe, have a close resemblance to that proposed by Major Douglas..."

The late Mr. Colin Barclay-Smith, Editor of the Social Credit journal, The New Era, commented in the issue of July 25th, 1941:
"He was the pioneer of the Faculty of Economics in the University of Sydney, Professor of Economics from 1912, and the first Dean of the Faculty from 1920 until his retirement because of ill health in 1922.... Social Crediters owe Professor Irvine a deep debt of gratitude because he insisted upon the books of Major Douglas being studied as part of the Economics Course at Sydney University. That was twenty years ago (from 1941 ... O.T.)... Professor Irvine then accepted the Economics Chair at Adelaide University, but here again a series of articles on financial credit from his able pen brought him into question with the Nabobs of Financial Orthodoxy."

FROM THE SUN (MELBOURNE) MAY 22nd

Determined To Integrate
"As a migrant, I am tired of hearing complaints about not getting a fair go in Australia. "A migrant's integration is up to the individual's determination. "Ability to adapt in a new country lies mainly in learning to correctly write, read and speak the language used there. "Responsibility and cooperation are also some of the best assets to success. "Voluntary work for charity or social clubs is a very good way to let people know your willingness for communication. "Generosity and an open mind are appreciated and always well rewarded.
I came from France in 1972, at 33, a mother of three. I could not read, write or speak English, so I could not expect to acquire the job I had been trained for in France. I had to start a completely new career. "Starting as a process worker, I worked my way up to a clerk computer data processor. Sometimes it was a pretty rough road, but I decided not to be defeated. I kept on trying. "Stopped by health problems, I had to start all over again. I tried my skill at writing. "One of my poems was published a few months ago. I joined the Australian Women Writers' Association to increase my incentive, looking forward to learn more, to achieve more. "After fifteen years living here and now a grandmother of six, I consider I am well integrated. "I have a wonderful life and am proud to be Australian. You could feel that way, too. That is only up to you." (Mrs. Nicole Tolosa-Millard, Avoca, Vic.)