|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
6 March 1992. Thought for the Week: "Today 'representation' has become a kind of profession, virtually a lifelong career. There is a growing class of 'professional politicians' for whom politics is an occupation and a means of livelihood. They are ever involved in intricate parliamentary maneuvers and there is little point in speaking about 'the will of the people' in this context. One is also struck by the preponderance of jurists and lawyers in most parliaments; one might designate it a 'jurocracy'. (Such a term is all the more appropriate since the plethora of laws and the complexity of legal procedures are such that an ordinary citizen is virtually incapable of defending himself before the law and needs the costly help of an attorney at every step of the way.)"
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in Rebuilding Russia (1990)
KEATING GOES FOR BROKE
by David Thompson
THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORY
The importance of history is illustrated in the debate. While the planning for the defence of Singapore and Malaya may have been inadequate, Australia was as much to blame as Britain. Thousands of British troops died in the Malayan peninsula, or were captured at Singapore. Professor Geoffrey Blainey took Keating to task: "It's not really true. Mr. Keating says that Britain decided not to defend the Malayan peninsula; there is no truth in that. He says Britain decided not to worry about Singapore; well there is no truth in that, because Britain sent out her two great warships." The battleships Repulse and Prince of Wales, however, were sent without air cover, and were both sunk. While it is possible to be highly critical of Britain's conduct of the war, it should be remembered that not all mistakes were "Britain's". Unpalatable as it is to many of us, many of the mistakes were Churchill's, taken either on his own, or in defiance of advice from his military staff. David Irving's Churchill's War throws a whole new light on World War II, and emphasises the importance of history on the future of a nation.
VICTIMS OF INTERNATIONALISM
The British will even lose their flag, of which Keating is in favour for Australia. It should be noted that Mrs. Thatcher leads a growing clamour of British people for a referendum on Europe before "the people are deprived of their rights". Keating has no intention of asking Australians for their opinion on his process of internationalisation through Asia. The fact that former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser has supported Keating's campaign to redirect Australia's national consciousness to Asia simply confirms the memory of the disastrous Fraser Government. Many of the betrayals began under Fraser, and were continued by Hawke. The truth is that Australia is not an Asian country. Nations live in time, as well as space. Physical geography is less important than cultural and spiritual origins.
Mr. Keating effectively spits upon a cultural
heritage which stems from an ancient spiritual base, not a geographical
(European) base. He seeks to deny - even destroy - the unmistakably
Christian basis for our law, national institutions like Parliament and
the Constitution, the flag with the Christian crosses in one corner.
The national anthem was once a hymn, God Save the Queen. Such heritage
is anathema to the humanists and republicans, who must see it destroyed
on the altar of internationalism. Even our language, inherited from
Britain, is in the process of perversion. Keating's railing against
Australia's cultural origins and our own distinct identity perhaps reflects
his own personal insecurities.
THE ECONOMIC STATEMENT
With his one off payment to families in April, the Prime Minister even emulates the concept of the national dividend: a basic payment to enable the individual to subsist, except in this case the individual must still foot the bill somehow, because the $2.3 billion price tag for this financial injection must still be paid by the taxpayer somehow.
In order to "kick start" the economy, Keating has also dabbled with constructive policies with proven anti -inflationary records. He has borrowed from Whitlam's treasurer, Dr. Jim Cairns, by dropping sales tax on new motorcars by 5%. This is sensible, and should be extended across the board. However, dropping the price of cars is ineffective if no one has the money for one anyhow. Mr. Rob McEniry, G.M.H. director of marketing, said: "For private motorists, it's still a matter of whether they've got the disposable income to spend on a vehicle. I'm not expecting the private sector to start buying cars again until the whole economy picks up."
FURTHER BANK INTERNATIONALISATION
The well-paid managing director of the National Australia Bank, Mr. Don Argus, commented that "the offshore banking initiatives would help Australia build itself as an Asian-Pacific financial centre". This helps ease Australia into a regional relationship with Asia, towards a regional common market. Mr. Keating is also seeking to boost the shrinking foreign investment to a flood by dropping most of the restrictions to foreign investment in Australian industry and agriculture. That is, he is quite prepared to "sell the farm" in order to finance his own desperate campaign for the Prime Ministership - for power. The relaxation of such restrictions is supposed to facilitate "big projects".
The emphasis on "bigness" is significant. The Statement proposes to "upgrade" electricity transmission links nationwide. This is also an attempt to dilute the States' control of power generation and supply, a constitutional power not yet available to the Commonwealth. That is, electricity generation and supply can be effectively centralised. Lenin did exactly the same when the Bolsheviks came to power in the Soviet Union.
LIES AND WISHFUL THINKING
Under the rules of conventional finance - that is, debt finance - it is quite certain that in the end the taxpayer must pay for Mr. Keating's re-election gamble. If he loses the gamble, he will absolve himself of all responsibility for the mess that results, since it will be up to the Opposition to clean it up. If Keating can "sell" the "One Australia" package to an electorate easily as desperate as he is, it is likely that any perceived benefits are illusions. It is openly admitted that unemployment will barely improve. The national debt must increase, and analysts expect the balance of payments to blow out again.
MASKED IMAGES OF AUSTRALIAfrom The Australian, February 27th
Professor Donald Horne and his Ideas for Australia Conference really need not worry about the necessity of 'de-colonialising' our education curriculum. "Colonial and imperial history, for instance, have not been taught in most Melbourne or Sydney schools for over a decade now: most teachers opt instead for contemporary sociological survey and the ideology of the late Professor Manning Clark. (By the look of The Weekend Australian, there has been a recent outbreak of colonial interest in remote Dubbo, but a swift directive from Tom Keneally or Sydney University should fix that.) "I suppose that many people would object to Mr. Dawkins' decision to donate $500,000 to support the professor's thinking processes. A more serious objection is the conference's self-confessed desire to create images of Australia. "Apart from the hubris of this ambition, there are surely two other serious problems with this approach.
The first is that any national identity worth having is not something which can be deliberately imposed but rather something which develops over time (and many Australians would say that a very definite national identity has developed over the past 200 years and that people who do not recognise it are either ignorant of our history or pursuing some agenda of their own).
The second is that the people in the professor's team are not necessarily representative of the majority of ordinary Australians, who have not indeed been consulted as to whether they wanted new 'images' created about their country in the first place. "Perhaps those of us who consider that a national identity had already emerged quite successfully from a colonial past can go on teaching how this came about? "This is an abandoned study called Australian history, and it examines the national self concept before 1972 as well as after it." (Neville J. Clark, Headmaster, Mentone Grammar School, Vic., 3194)
MOULDED BY LIFE - OR BAD GENES?
from The Australian, March 2nd
In his latest work, the eminent A.N.U. anthropologist Professor Derek Freeman demolishes the Margaret Mead 'nurture over nature' mythology beloved by Freudians. Dr. Anthony Storr (Human Aggression) says we need more biological research into human behaviour. Even Stalin calls egalitarianism 'appalling' and said social justice would require even greater inequalities.
"The answer to Ronald's question 'Are many criminals beyond hope of rehabilitation because of bad genes'? - is yes. The human behaviour source program is the genetic code, and some people are born without conscience or compassion just as some are born without arms. Psychoanalysis can't help them, although it may help the analysts. "Melbourne University may still, as Ronald says, be focusing on Freudian psychoanalysis as it was 40 years ago. Studies in the United States got me away from that, and later genetics studies eliminated the remains. For which I am grateful. But I wish I could undo some of the damage I must have done to my early students and analysands (sic) with the Freudian fakery. As Lord Acton so wisely said, 'Beware of those who wish to inflict benefit on us'. "Bring your brilliant mind over to genetics, Ronald. Like Cortex, you will find there's a whole new ocean to explore." Andrew Toal, Tanah Merah, Qld.
STANDING BY: A CONTRAST IN HEIRS
These being excerpts taken from the article, by Randall J. Dicks, in Heritage (December 1991-February 1992. Heritage is the quarterly journal of The Australian Heritage Society, a Division of the Australian League of Rights. Send $6.00 to your nearest State League Office for a copy (includes postage).
"One of the advantages or attributes of hereditary monarchy is that one knows in advance who will be the next king or queen, and sometimes even beyond that. At the end of the long life and reign of Queen Victoria, one knew that her son Albert Edward would succeed her, and his son George would succeed him, and his son Edward would succeed him, just as, at present, one assumes that Queen Elizabeth II's son will become King Charles III some day, and his son will become King William V in due course. There is a fixed line of succession, in the British, Australian, or any other modern monarchy.
"People sometimes wonder what is the good of modern monarchy, what is the good of a king who reigns but does not rule, how can one justify the supposed 'expense' of monarchy. One can certainly turn the tables and ask the same questions about republics. What is the good of Vice President Quayle (U.S.A.)? What is the good of a Vice President who does nothing? How can one justify the expense of a Vice President who does nothing - his offices and staff, his official residence, his vacation home, his travel (like the President, he has a rather large jet). This Vice President costs a lot, but the people seem to receive very little in return.
"The Prince is deeply concerned about declining educational standards, and about literacy. He is passionate about the environment, about architecture, about preserving historic landmarks. These interests are genuine. He has said, for example, that his interest in architecture is 'not a result of trying to find something to fill my day'. He is actively involved in urban planning, he visits cities and towns and slums. He talks to the poor, the inhabitants of the inner cities, and, most important, he listens to them. His popularity with the poor is enormous and real..."
Some 20 years ago the Australian League of Rights
issued, for mass distribution, three special brochures...
But from the "Crown or Republic" brochure
"The hereditary Monarchy fosters national unity and social stability immediately the Monarch dies, the eldest member of the family, trained and educated for a task of destiny, ascends the Throne and claims immediate allegiance ("The King is dead, long live the King"). "There is no power struggle, no friction, but a sense of continuity. The Monarch has no political post and no party followers to reward, and has no party opponents who detest the Monarch. There is no need for spectacular triumphs or gimmicks to win popular support ..
"The most shallow argument of all against the Crown is that it is 'not our own' and that Australians are 'clinging to the relics of their colonial past by expressing their allegiance to a British Monarch'. This is not true. The fact that many Australians do not understand that Queen Elizabeth II is as much Queen OF AUSTRALIA as she is Queen of the United Kingdom, of Canada or New Zealand, is a serious reflection upon the Australian education system. Her Governors and Governor Generals are Australian in the sense that they work to maintain the Royal system of Government in the Australian context. They are just as Australian as are the Australian Parliaments and the Courts, where the Queen's writ runs "
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|