Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Home blog.alor.org Newtimes Survey The Cross-Roads Library
OnTarget Archives The Social Crediter Archives NewTimes Survey Archives Brighteon Video Channel Veritas Books

On Target

12 July 1991. Thought for the Week: "Let no one tell you the Fabian Society has faded or is only a pale relic of a byegone day. Let no one tell you it is mild, gentle or harmless. Here is the evidence that it has neither declined nor passed away, even if it sometimes chooses to play dead. "It is not that the Fabian Society is dead, but that our own world is threatened with death. Nearly all the conditions necessary for such demise have been set up, including the barefaced announcement that God is 'dead'."
Rose Martin, authoress of Fabian Freeway.


by David Thompson
The secret movement for an Australian republic came out into the open last Sunday with the formal launching of the Australian Republican Movement (A.R.M.) in Sydney, effectively drawing the battle lines for the Constitutional future of Australia. The gaggle of Fabians, Marxists, humanists and left wingers in general who have announced their support for the A.R.M. contain no surprises for us so far.

Leftwing author Thomas Keneally is President of the movement, with Mrs. Franca Arena, A.L.P. Member of the N.S.W. Legislative Council, Secretary. We have been aware for some time that for over a year this movement has been secretly recruiting prominent people for their names and finance to launch the 10-year campaign for a republic. The formal launching of this movement could ultimately prove a serious mistake for the republicans. It now provides form, focus and a timetable to what was hitherto only a nebulous type of leftwing ratbaggery.

The coming campaign will undoubtedly be one of the biggest in which the League has ever been involved. Fewer movements are better equipped, and none better motivated to defend 200 years of Australian constitutional government, 1,000 years of British constitutional experience and 2,000 years of Christian heritage. The republican group was about to launch full-page press advertisements earlier this year, but were baulked by the Gulf War. "They thought it would look unpatriotic", remarked one of Australia's best-known executives in confidence to an Age columnist last month. Of course the passing of the heat of the Gulf War means nothing; it is still unpatriotic!

Others supporting this movement include former N.S.W. Premier, Neville Wran, authors Donald Horne and David Williamson, and David Hill, Managing Director of the A.B.C. Some of the names also appear on such bodies as the Steering Committee for the M.F.P. (John Menadue, Whitlam's head of the Prime Minister's Department), Ausflag, the "One-World-Or-None" environmental propaganda campaign of 1989, and other like bodies. Franca Arena, Blanche D'Apulget (writer) and Jenny Kee (fashion designer) all sponsored "One-World-Or-None". Others include: Ian Chappell (former cricket captain), Geraldine Doogue and Mark Day (journalists), Malcolm Turnbull (lawyer and merchant banker), Harry Seidler (architect), Faith Bandler (writer), Bruce Petty (cartoonist) and Professor George Winterton (author of "Monarchy to Republic: Australian Republican Government").

The launching of the republican movement follows debate at the recent A.L.P. conference in Tasmania. Although it is quite certain that the republican movement includes leading State and Federal politicians, they are mainly smart enough to keep their heads down for the present. They know that such a movement will dramatically polarise the Australian electorate. The A.R.M. is undoubtedly intended to take the "heat" off the A.L.P. on this issue. The muted debate on John Dawkins' resolution for a republic at the A.L.P. conference confirms the political sensitivity of the issue. But the Dawkins' resolution should be recorded and remembered: "This conference calls upon the Government to embark upon a public education campaign, culminating in a referendum, which would effect the constitutional reform necessary to enable Australia to become an independent republic on January 26th (Australia Day) 2001." At the April constitutional conference in Sydney, Mr. Hawke declined to place a timetable upon what he called the 'inevitable' move to republicanism. The new movement provides the timetable, which coincides with Dawkins' timetable, and must place much additional pressure on the A.L.P.

A republic is described by Hawke, Dawkins, Keneally - even Sir Roden Cutler (former N.S.W. Governor) - and many others as "inevitable". This is to be vigorously resisted for the psychological warfare that it is. Perhaps Sir Roden is a victim. The greatest technical stumbling block to a republic is, of course, the constitutional necessity for a referendum. This will be preceded by one of the most intensive propaganda campaigns ever seen in Australia. A republic is not inevitable unless those proposing it are much better organised (and funded) than those loyal to the Crown. The subversion of the Monarchy has been a gradual process, and takes the classical Marxist form of the "inevitability of gradualism". This inevitability' is implicitly denied by Dawkins himself when he says: "The 'inevitability' of the Australian republic will not come to pass without a concerted campaign of political education over the next decade before the year 2001. The Government must be asked to make a concerted effort to inform Australians about what a republic will mean for Australia and its system of government ...." If a republic is inevitable, why the propaganda? Why squander taxpayers' money browbeating them into a position that they do not support? Because it is the only way a republic can be achieved. The propaganda campaign has already started - "the" republic being referred to as though it already exists, and merely awaits a rubber stamp by referendum.

This republican movement is not about better, more accountable government. It is a takeover bid for Australia's spiritual and cultural identity. Keneally tacitly admitted this last Sunday, when he referred to the colonial past, and said: "We came to feel we possessed both an inherent worthiness which would ensure that other, our betters, would look after us, and an inherent inferiority complex which convinced us we were not worthy to manage ourselves, or speak with an independent voice. Both these suspicions were delusions and both have damaged us and have kept and will continue to keep us a stunted nation. If we wish to be a genuine nation, we cannot indulge for much longer our lust for dependence on others... Our future obviously belongs in another part of the world (Asia Pacific) with different people...."
Such pathetic insecurity cannot go unchallenged. It was Australians who pioneered this country under harsh conditions, and Australians who defended it in time of war. Certainly they were European (specifically British) values and standards that underwrote our development morally, but to deliberately denigrate and deny such a heritage is a distinct sign of immaturity and insecurity.
A nation is much more than a geographical entity ("a part of Asia") - it exists in the context of time and culture. The deliberately Christian origins and influence of the Monarchy underscore this and are a primary reason why they are attacked by the Fabians and humanists. It is not merely a traditional form of government that must be defended (until something demonstrably better offers itself) but the very identity of the nation. It would be a bad mistake to assume that the republicans want change for the sake of change. They have not even bothered to argue that a republic would provide a better system of government. Where is the evidence of this? No, this change is a means to an end; to cut Australians off from their roots, so as to more readily fit them into the emerging international structure.
The regionalisation of the world (as with the European Community) is proceeding, and it is proposed to fit Australia into the developing United States of Asia as a formal regional sovereign entity - a preparation for Lenin's world State. A nation cut off from its identity, history, culture and traditions is merely flotsam on the tide of history and could scarcely resist the erosion of any remaining sovereignty into a regional power bloc.

It is not only the Monarchy that has become a target. The symbols of a rich political and spiritual heritage must be swept away. God Save the Queen was swept away overnight by Whitlam, but the flag has proved a much tougher target. It is more popular than ever, and as a symbol provides a powerful emotional rallying point for loyalists. This must be intelligently exploited. The campaign to save the Union Jack on the Australian flag must go into top gear.

The formation of a special task force to fight for the preservation of the monarchy by the Liberal Party is most encouraging. It would be uncharitable to suggest that the Coalition badly feels the need for an electoral fillip if they propose to carry the baggage of an electoral liability like the consumption tax into the next election. But if the Liberals are serious, they will need to sharpen their performance considerably to be effective. John Howard's debate with Professor Winterton on the A.B.C's. 7.30 Report a few weeks ago was apologetic and unconvincing in support of the monarchy. The Liberals will have to do much, much better than this, but should be encouraged strongly.

Our message to supporters is simple. Clear the decks for the next great battle - a battle that can and must be won: a constitutional monarchy, or a humanist republic. It is quite clear that any future republic would reject the Christian origins of our heritage, and must be essentially humanist. The churches must be challenged about their position. The next 10 years will produce another generation of Australians who will qualify in a referendum on a republic. This generation is a prime target for republicans, naturally.
Every effort should be made to see that they glean some understanding of our heritage, and the contribution of permanence and stability provided by the Monarchical system. This may be difficult in the present educational environment, but not impossible. The best tool to begin this process that we have yet seen is a new, brief, powerful cassette recording, The Voice of the Australian Flag. Produced by a group of Queenslanders, this brilliant tool is a most valuable service to loyal Australians at this critical time. At a time when one of the fastest growing movements in the Soviet Union is back to a monarchy, each supporter is called upon to equip himself appropriately for the campaign. This means securing essential resources. While other material and strategy is developed specifically to meet the challenge, the following are of immediate value: Freedom Wears a Crown by John Farthing - the Australian edition with an introduction by Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, $10.00. The Voice of the Australian Flag cassette tape: $10.00 for two copies (you will need a minimum of two).

In Brief

DID THEY DIE IN VAIN? from The Sunday Age (Melbourne), July 7th
"I take issue with your editorial stance and with your premature approach to a few graphic artists to sketch replacements for the national flag. "A people so immature that it cannot accept its own history as enshrined in its national flag - and surely ours is the most beautiful national flag in the world - is unlikely to build a confident future. "All our institutions are derived from the British Isles. Freedom did not come to us from continental Europe, nor will it come from Asia. Why change the institutions, which have preserved that freedom so successfully until the present? "One hundred thousand Australians have died this century in defence of that freedom and of those institutions. If they could speak now, would they really want us to change the flag they died under? (N.J. Clark, Headmaster, Mentone Grammar School, Melbourne, Vic., 3194)

Efforts by Labor's John Dawkins, Liberal's Philip Ruddock, and Treasury's Stephen Rimmer (The Australian, 25-26-27/6) to dig up the long lost immigration debate are very welcome. "One smelly little rort remains buried. A committee of seven from the National Population Council has been charged with drawing up Australia' population policy to the year 2030. "Of the less than magnificent seven, three earn their daily bread from promoting multiculturalism: Castles, Christoffanini and Iredale. Two are rabid supporters of the paid consultants to the ethnic lobby: Withers and Toyne. One sits on the fence: Hugo. And only one opposes immigration: Birrell. "The committee's discussion paper called Population Issues and Australia's Future is 50,000 words long. Not once does the word STABLE or the word STABILISE appear, not even as one extreme in the range of options. "We might be a nation of big pineapples, big bananas and big merinos. But only a nation of the big cultural cringe could pay a five to one majority of foreign agents to draft its future." (Zero-Population-Growth, Wollongong, N. S .W.)

SCRUTINISE BAN, from The Australian, July 2nd
"Congratulations to Neil Brown for highlighting the impact of the Federal Government's 'broadcast ban' legislation (The Australian, 27/6). "I should point out that the legislation was 'guillotined' through the House of Representatives after less than four hours of debate on May 30, and is due to be debated in the Senate on August 13. The Coalition will strenuously oppose the objectionable legislation, so it will need the support of the Democrats in the Senate to become law. "Last week the Democrats voted with the A.L.P. to prevent the proposal from being examined by an all-party committee. If ever a piece of legislation needed detailed scrutiny, it is this one - yet the Democrats have refused a hearing to those thousands of Australians who have objected to the Government's plans to gag free speech." (Warwick Parer, Shadow Minister for Administrative Services, Canberra)

ESCAPE CLAUSE, from The Australian, July 2nd
"Mr. Neil Brown's analysis, Free Gifts or Free Speech (The Australian, 27/6) had it right. The Political Broadcasts and Political Donations Bill is tainted by some curious clauses that crept in at the last moments of the debate in the House. "Unfortunately, Mr. Brown did not look hard enough at Clause 314AA(2), Mr. Kerin's amendment, which wrecks the whole disclosure bit by allowing the Minister to exempt sensitive donors, either persons or organisations, from having their names disclosed." (Kevin McSweeney, Bateman's Bay, N.S.W.)


by Jeremy Lee
There is now open alarm among the 'one worlders' at Margaret Thatcher's refusal to go away. The one thing they do NOT want now, with Britain seemingly 'in the bag', is any public referral to the matter of sovereignty and heritage. The Sydney Morning Herald (June 29th) spelled out the implications for Britain:

"... As they stand, the draft treaties on monetary and political union would dramatically change life and government in the United Kingdom. In the grand scheme of things, its pound sterling would be replaced by the euro and most foreign policy would be conducted on its behalf from Brussels; interest rates would be fixed by a European Central Bank beyond the grasp of politicians, and government borrowings would be dictated by rigid E.C. rules; crime would be fought by a European equivalent of the F.B.I. and British soldiers would be committed to a European Rapid Reaction Force.
Individually, Britons would be limited to no more than 48 hours work a week ... they would carry identity cards and be identified first as Europeans on their passports; their favourite tobacco and spirits would no longer be advertised and their children would be schooled according to Europe wide standards ... They would pay a European tax direct to Brussels..."

A feature article in the Financial Review (July 1st) pointed out that President Bush is stepping up efforts to create a new trading bloc to include both Mexico and Canada: "... In addition to Mexico, President Bush is proposing to extend the existing U.S.-Canadian free-trade zone to include Latin-American countries... The article went on:

"... Besides moving swiftly towards the creation of a more cohesive European identity through political union and greater economic and monetary union, the European Community is negotiating to extend its trading power to cover virtually all the countries of Europe at present not part of the E.C. It is also considering trading links with the emerging new democracies of central Europe ... The 'Grand Design' for a Brussels controlled Europe, in its concluding stages with only 18 months to go until the new European flag (blue with a gold circle of stars) takes precedence over the Union Jack, does NOT NEED a high-profile former Prime Minister, never defeated at the polls, talking about national sovereignty. The Guardian Weekly (July 1st) devoted a series of articles to the "Thatcher reaction". Although the paper attempts to portray her as kicking against the pricks of inevitability, there is a faintly anxious air implicit in its own articles.
The Conservative Party, once adamantly pro-European, is now deeply divided. The Labour Party, once briefly anti-European, is now eulogistic about Brussels. Edward Heath, another ex-P.M., in a venomous and vitriolic speech, has challenged Mrs. Thatcher to speak in the House of Commons on the issue, where he can get at her. But her audience is now the general public, both at home and abroad - an audience that is swamping her with invitations.
A letter to The Guardian by W.H. Cousins, Founder of the European Federal Union Movement in 1957, shows the philosophy of the 'one worlders': The force of mankind's economic and political evolution is now inexorable. No small country will be able to opt out for long. A united Europe is inevitable, with or without the U.K., or Mrs. Thatcher's agreement ... She appears to be ignorant of mankind's economic and political evolution. Darwin and Wallace dealt only with man's natural development. To date the thread of his political evolution can be clearly traced through family, city, state, petty kingdom and nation. The next step is obvious…One can only ask, who is the political equivalent of Darwin's natural theory? Lenin? Marx? Montague Norman? George Bush? Or are they themselves merely the 'catspaws' for the money power?

Shortly before the "republican" resolution at the A.L.P's. Hobart Conference; The Age reported the uniting of 100 prominent Australian business and political figures in a new campaign for a republic Australia. The Hobart resolution was no 'knee jerk' reaction from a squabbling and discredited political party droning its swansong. The 1982 A.L.P. Platform, Constitution and Rules included the following (page 2): "Reform of the Australian Constitution and other political institutions to ensure they reflect the will of the majority of Australian citizens and the existence of Australia as an independent republic."
The Sydney Morning Herald (June 29th, 1991) reported: "We are about to witness the formation of the Australian Republican Movement to promote the idea that Australia becomes a republic as soon as possible. Author Thomas Keneally is founding president and among other prominent persons involved are former modern day Medici, Franco Belgiorno-Nattis, banker Malcolm Turnbull and former N.S.W. Premier Neville Wran, who says he wants to stay in the background. "This is not a political issue," he told me yesterday. "There are a great many people of all political persuasions who support the idea." - Which makes the widespread distribution of the inspiring cassette tape "The Voice of The Australian Flag" all the more important.

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159