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

8 July 1987. Thought for the Week: "Barbarism is a condition of life characterised by primitive standards and methods of living, superstition, and absence of moral and spiritual ideas. What we call civilisation is the emergence from this condition, and the in building into society of ideas and institutions of moral order and spiritual values. In this concept, progress consists in the incarnation in customs, behaviour and institutions of Reality ever more profoundly understood: true progress is moral progress, of which the outward manifestation is Art. In all this, science is no more than a tool for the exploration of Reality; and while technology may display art, it too is a tool. Yet science and technology have become ends in themselves ... The end of Man is no longer ultimate union with God, but the part he plays in the expansion of the gross national product. All this is simply a reversion to a new but complex and highly dangerous barbarism."
Dr. Bryan Monahan in The Moving Storm


In his much publicised three-and-a-half-hours address in the Kremlin's Palace of Congresses, Mikhail Gorbachev claimed that his vision of a new socialism was a return to the first principles of Leninism. In his recently published book, Perestroika, Gorbachev spelt out his admiration for Lenin, stating "The works of Lenin and his ideals of Socialism remained for us an inexhaustible source of dialectical creative thought, theoretical wealth and political sagacity."

Gorbachev is furthering a myth, which has been widely accepted among both Communists and non-Communists: that the "Socialist ideals" of Lenin had been betrayed by his successors, starting with Stalin. But Stalin also appealed to the principles of Leninism, as witnessed by his work, The Foundations of Leninism. Like his predecessors, Gorbachev is concerned with two basic questions, holding power and the operation of an economic system, which will keep the victims of the Soviet system sufficiently satisfied to ensure there is no major threat to that power.

Lenin was a master of the same dialectical method used by all Soviet leaders, and now being applied by Gorbachev. During the first years of the Soviet regime, Lenin's major problem was economic; how to ensure adequate basic production, particularly of food. He introduced his New Economic Policy (NEP), which superficial observers claimed was a retreat from Marxism. Lenin saw it quite differently; a dialectical step backwards as part of a total step forward. And, of course, it encouraged that flow of economic blood transfusions, which have been vital for the sustenance of all Communist nations.
All the Soviet leaders, including Stalin, have been well aware of how dependent they have been on support from the very "capitalists" denigrated in their propaganda.

Like the Communist leaders in China, Gorbachev is painfully aware of the growing economic problems associated with not only feeding, but the provision of consumers goods, for a growing population. There is also the problem of sustaining massive military machines. Like his idol before him, Gorbachev urgently requires the equivalent of the New Economic policy in order to obtain a massive increase in Western production.

The International Bankers and many of the Captains of Big Industry are openly delighted with the prospects now opening up before them. Most of the representatives of these groups are supporters of the New International Economic Order which the Communist leaders everywhere not only endorse, but claim was first promoted by the great Lenin himself. Lenin taught that the World State was impossible unless an international economic system, with the abolition of national economic sovereignties, was established.

Gorbachev's political reforms, like his economic reforms, must be seen in the context of his dialectical programme. The impression is being created that because, for example, Communist party chiefs can now be safely criticised by lesser members, the Soviet system is being moved closer to the Western political system. The reality is that while the machinery of representative government remains in the West, it has been subverted to the stage where, in the famous words of the former Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Hewart, a "new despotism" has been progressively imposed. The American people are still free to criticise their Presidents, or Presidential candidates, but they have been progressively surrendering to the same type of collectivist State imposed in the Soviet.

The Gorbachev programme, so enthusiastically endorsed by power groups in the West, is but part of a total global programme designed ultimately to merge all the peoples of the world into one World State. But already that programme is running into trouble as witnessed by the growing resistance of some of the many different nationalities inside the Soviet Empire. The very multiculturalism, which Australians are being urged to adopt, is now one of the biggest internal problems confronting the Gorbachev regime. The whole concept of a centrally planned world is so contrary to reality that it can be predicted with certainty that it is doomed to failure. But as demonstrated so graphically in the Soviet Union, millions of people suffer in the process.

Australians must continue to insist that they retain effective control over their own affairs, and that all international programmes, particularly those which link Australia to Soviet and other Communist influence, are rejected. (Recommended reading: Dialectics, by Eric Butler. A study of the use of dialectics as an instrument for world government. $3 posted from all League bookshops. National Suicide, by Dr. Antony Sutton. A documentation of the history of Western aid to the Soviet Union. $10 posted).


We have warned over recent years that CER (Closer Economic Relations) between Australia and New Zealand was a step in a total programme designed to bring a "united" Australia and New Zealand into a Pacific Common Market as part of the global programme for the New International Economic Order. New Zealand Attorney General Palmer, who signed an agreement in Darwin last week, is a Fabian, said that a common currency would help achieve the objective of a common economy. Like a true Fabian, Mr. Palmer did not see a common currency happening immediately, "but it is something we will have to look at in the future. Remaining dairy farmers should start to face the reality that many of them are doomed under the New International Economic Order concept. The British are now starting to learn that they are also threatened with a common European currency. Their remaining sovereignty is being threatened.

With the federal government supporting a 5.5 percent national wage increase, fractionally less than the 6 percent being sought by the ACTU, the people of Melbourne may well ask why they are being victimised by yet another transport strike. Major employer groups, granted some tax relief by Treasurer Keating in his May mini-budget, are in agreement with the government that there is a necessity to maintain real wages over the next twelve months. But even a 6 percent increase would be no guarantee that real wages would be maintained. The real inflation rate will certainly be higher than Treasurer Keating's projections, while much of the wage increases will be lost by higher taxes, a prospect warmly welcomed by the tax collectors. Higher wages must in turn result in higher prices.

The cosmetic differences between the Hawke government and the ACTU in the national wage case has enabled Marxist John Halfpenny to exploit the fears of wage earners who have suffered a fall in real wages over the past four years. The Hawke government could undermine the Halfpenny strategy by granting an immediate increase in wages by 3 percent and the use of his much publicised budget surplus to offer tax cuts. But Keating and Hawke are more concerned with pursuing a financial policy acceptable to the International Bankers while holding back tax cuts until just prior to the next Federal Elections. Industrial chaos is the inevitable result of financial orthodoxy. (Recommended reading: A Programme For Reversing Inflation by Eric D. Butler. $2 posted.)

A report from Moscow says that some of the Communist leaders executed by Stalin following his famous show trials, are now to be exonerated. False confessions were used during the trials. It is also reported that the Soviet Union is moving towards recognising that the NKVD security police massacred thousands of captured Polish officers in the Katyn forest. The mass graves were discovered when the Germans attacked the Soviet Union, the Germans immediately asking an international commission to investigate. The Soviet rejected the German revelation and charged the Germans with this mass killing. Soviet judges sat in judgment on the German leaders at the Nuremberg trials! But in spite of the Soviet record, there is no suggestion that the Soviet should hand over those responsible for war crimes just as terrible as those allegedly committed by Germans, Eastern Europeans and others.

It is unfortunately true that sex abuse of children is a reality. But it is also true that there has been widespread exaggeration of the extent of such abuse with shattering results for large numbers of parents and children. Over one hundred outraged parents in England are taking legal action against the Australian born Dr. Marietta Higgs and welfare authorities for false charges of sex abuse and the break up of families. Similar action is now being taken by hundreds of South Australian parents whose families have been torn apart by charges of sex abuse by welfare officials. Studies around the world indicate that the grossly exaggerated charges of parent's sex abusing their children are part of a conscious strategy for breaking up families. The South Australian situation is one which students of subversion will be watching closely.

The Sun, Melbourne, of June 29th carries a report from Los Angeles, stating that as the result of the publication of The Two Faces of George Bush, by famous research authority, Dr. Antony Sutton, under the imprint of Veritas Publishing Co., Western Australia, Presidential contender Bush has been forced to reveal his continued membership in the secret 'Skull and Bones' Society at Yale University. Other explosive information is provided in the Sutton work. We are holding a limited supply of the Book. Price $8 posted.


Mr. Peter Reith, the Opposition Shadow Attorney General (Canberra) writes to The Age (published 22/6): "The letter from Mr. Ian Cunliffe (8/6) exhibits the subtle but partisan approach of Labor's Constitutional Commission. "Mr. Cunliffe failed to highlight the fact that after the Constitutional Commission made its mailing list available to promote a commercial venture, I sought the same rights for distribution for the 'No' case for the forthcoming referendums. Mr. Cunliffe pointed out that the Commission offered to distribute 'No' case material but failed to mention that the Commission wanted to reserve the right to censor the material. "Obviously I was not prepared to accept that a taxpayer funded body should be able to censor the Opposition's views. "There is a lot more to the four referendums than the Labor Party is prepared to tell the electorate and I am sure many people will be very concerned when they hear details of the extent to which Mr. Hawke and Mr. Keating want to tamper with their constitutional rights. "So far, the Commission, with $6 million of taxpayers' money has been pushing the 'Yes' case. "I do not want the names of people on the Commission's mailing list, I only want to make sure that people have an opportunity to hear the other side of the argument without it being censored."


This material (below) was part of an advertisement inserted in The Advertiser (Adelaide 11/6. It was inserted by the Baltic Communities in South Australia:
"In June this year the Baltic people of Australia are remembering the Baltic Holocaust - the first of many infamous mass deportations of Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians from their homelands to Soviet slave labour and extermination camps in June 1941. Some 60,000 innocent people from all walks of life were brutally taken from their homes in the night of June 13, 14 - 1941. Men, women, and children starved in cattle trucks en route to Siberia. Many died of cold and disease in the Gulag Archipelago. "The first deportations were carried out by the Soviet Union at a time when the Soviets were still allies of the Nazis. "Winston Churchill wrote at the time: 'we have never recognised the 1941 frontiers of Russia. They were acquired by acts of aggression and shameful collusion with Hitler. The transfer of the people of the Baltic States to Soviet Russia against their will is contrary to all the principles we are fighting this war and would dishonour our cause….' Yet the cause was repeatedly dishonoured by the Soviet Union after it became an ally of the Western democracies. The mass deportations of Baltic people were resumed by the Soviet Union in 1945 and continued unabated until 1950 and to a lesser extent until 1958. During that time 170,000 Estonians, 220,000 Latvians, and 370,000 Lithuanians; or 12% of the Baltic population; were deported or executed. These crimes against humanity were perpetrated well after the Nuremberg Tribunal where the Soviet Union, together with Western powers, sat in judgment for war crimes of the vanquished. Why were the war crimes committed by the Soviet Union not judged at Nuremberg? Lest we forget!"


"Ted Guy", of Reservoir, Vic. (Melb. suburb) asks the question as published in The Australian (29/61:
"Your editorial 'When External Power Means Internal Rule' (21/6) pinpoints the bewilderment of, perhaps, most Australians and raises the following questions: Who, or what, is this demigod 'World Heritage Bureau' that ownership of the people's real estate can be invested in it without responsibility to those people? "And where, within the Constitution (or within our Westminster heritage) does ANY government have the right to give away the real estate of individuals or the people collectively? And by what yardstick do they decide which pieces of real estate, such as Ayers Rock, should be handed over exclusively to one of our small ethnic groups, and which pieces, such as one of the Franklin River areas in Tasmania, be handed over to World Heritage?"
© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159