PRINCE CHARLES AND THE AUSTRALIAN MONARCHY

by David Thompson
The appearance of Prince Charles in Sydney on Australia Day in January 1994 will mark the 5th anniversary of the Prince's bi-centennial Australia Day address in 1988, on the forecourt of the Sydney Opera House. The Prince's 1994 visit will help test the fervour of the republican cause, which appears to have waned in recent months. The close personal association of Prime Minister Keating with the republican movement has undoubtedly seriously damaged public support for a republic. The Prime Minister's arrogant, abusive nature has become a serious liability, which is even beginning to jeopardise Australia's international relations, as the Malaysian affair demonstrates. He has certainly helped bring republicanism into ill repute.

But does this mean that the republican cause in Australia is lost? In our view it certainly does not. There are much more able and astute figures behind the campaign against the Crown than Mr. Keating. It means that in the present hiatus, the hard-line republicans behind the visible republican movement are regrouping, distancing the republic from Mr. Keating's eventual political demise, and revising their strategy for the destruction of the Australian Monarchy.

THE IMPORTANCE OF PRINCE CHARLES

What is required of those loyal to the Crown, is to take the initiative while the republican cause is in disarray, and demonstrate that loyalty during the Prince of Wales' visit. The Australian Heritage Society proposes to provide a lead in this, by taking out an advertisement welcoming Prince Charles, and re-affirming loyalty to the Crown in a prominent place in The Weekend Australian on January 22nd. The public will be invited to take part in this project, which can be duplicated in as many as possible other newspapers around the nation.

There is no doubt that Prince Charles is a central figure in the entire republican debate, even though protocol requires that he take little direct part in the debate. As the future King of Australia, however, even his indirect comments are significant. The Prince of Wales appears to be prepared to subject himself to whatever discipline is required to assume the throne, despite the unfortunate state of his marriage, and whatever constitutional complications this raises.

When he was in Australia in 1988, the Prince's address to the nation was inspirational. He said, "In two world wars, Australians fought wholeheartedly against intolerance and tyranny. They didn't just fight for the old Empire. They fought for freedom, which lasts, if it is looked after and nurtured..." In the British heritage of law, he said, "every family in this remarkable country has its rights protected and cherished.... The true celebration of this nation is its Constitution..."

In an earlier Royal Visit, in 1974, the Prince stated his views on the role of the Crown when addressing both Houses of Parliament in N.S.W.: "I also believe that the institution of Monarchy... is one of the strongest factors in a continuance of stable government."

With the ability to think for himself, and his sometimes-unorthodox ideas, Prince Charles would make no ordinary King. From the immense pressure under which he and his family have been placed, it is clear that Prince Charles is regarded as a threat to the further centralisation of power on a global scale. His support for French rural culture, under threat by the GATT negotiators, drew strong disfavour from the internationalists. Australia could yet be the key to the future of the monarchy throughout the British world. If the idea of monarchy dies in Australia, it is jeopardised everywhere. Let us take this opportunity to provide a right royal welcome for the Prince of Wales, and demonstrate support for the Crown itself.

BRIEF COMMENTS

The media have been full of dire warnings of what will happen to the world unless at long last, after seven years and tens of thousands of talks by a roving army of bureaucrats, the "Uraguay Round" of GATT agreements is not signed by December 15th. While the vital issue of agriculture has been highlighted, with the "selfish" French being blamed if an agreement is not reached, this tends to mask the fact that the GATT programme was designed to try to advance the vision of a New Global Economic Order.
The famous Lima Statement outlined the intention of the international planners: to force the nations of the world into surrendering control over their own economies. More than 100 governments are party to the current talks, which have covered nearly every conceivable kind of production. Should some kind of an agreement be reached, the media will be filled with euphoric comments about "booming" world trade and an end to the current global depression.
Any GATT agreement must result in casualties for some industries. In the violent protests in France on the eve of the December 15th deadline, French farmers were joined by fellow farmers from the U.S.A. and other countries, who fear the end of the family farm if the international planners have their way.

When a number of authorities warned that the MABO affair could lead to violence and civil war in Australia, opponents of, the Mabo Madness were accused of being "extremists" and, of course, "racists". But we have never heard of Charles Perkins, former head of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, being described as a "racist" - even though he once strongly criticised the policy of Asian immigration. Now Mr. Perkins has joined with others who have criticised Prime Minister Keating for helping to further the possibility of violence with his call for black leaders to "knock down" opponents of his MABO legislation. As Charles Perkins points out, echoing what people like Labor M.H.R. Graeme Campbell have been saying, this is inciting violence against the many Australians of Aboriginal background who are opposed to the MABO concept.
In Queensland the State Opposition Leader Borbidge has been accused of "racism' because he has charged that the Goss Government is favouring Aborigines at the expense of white Australians. Mr. Borbidge charges, "White Queenslanders are fed up to the back teeth with what is reverse racism. Enough is enough. What we are seeing is an extension of this Mabo madness. Paul Keating must accept the major responsibility for a madness, which, as Professor Blainey warns, threatens the very fabric of Australia as a nation.

A study of the Zionist Jewish press makes it clear that every effort is being made by the opponents of British historian David Irving to keep him out of Australia, in blatant defiance of the ruling in favour of Irving by the Federal Court. Clearly Immigration Minister Nick Bolkus is attempting delaying tactics by refusing to respond to Irving's application for a visa to visit Australia early next year. The Australian Jewish News of December 3rd reports that the Australian Institute of Polish Affairs has urged Bolkus to keep Irving out. Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett has also been approached. Zionist leader Isi Leibler has described the action by the Polish organisation as "most important and highly appreciated".
With a fine display of totalitarian spirit, Dr. Andrew Ehrenkrenutz of the Polish Institute says, "the very fact of Irving having been invited to Australia indicates that there are in our society individuals, groups or organisations who for political or economic reasons cynically discredit the reputation of our society. His public appearances in Australia would disinform audiences interested in modern history."
Australia has a reputation for defending freedom of speech within the law. Zionist totalitarians are telling Australians that they cannot be trusted to hear David Irving and to make up their own minds about what he is saying. From New Zealand comes a report that because Irving has been banned from entering Germany, an application for a New Zealand visa would also be rejected. Australian supporters of free speech might drop Mr. Bolkus a line telling him they do not favour any more totalitarianism in Australia.

Once again Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn warns the West, pointing out that Communism is far from dead in the former Soviet Union, that "In some republics, its institutional structures have survived in their entirety, while in all of them millions of Communist cadres remain in reserve, and its roots remain embedded in the consciousness and the daily life of the people". The election of Communists in Poland at the last election highlights Solzhenitsyn's warning. Western nations like Australia would be extremely foolish to link their future with nations of the former Soviet.