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

9 November 2001. Thought for the Week: This is a season of patriotism, but also of something that is easily mistaken for patriotism; namely, nationalism. The difference is vital. G.K. Chesterton once observed that Rudyard Kipling, the great poet of British imperialism, suffered from a "lack of patriotism". He explained: "He admires England, but he does not love her; for we admire things with reasons, but love them without reasons. He admires England because she is strong, not because she is English."
In the same way, many Americans admire America for being strong, not for being American. For them America has to be "the greatest country on earth" in order to be worthy of their devotion...

Patriotism is like family love. You love your family just for being your family, not for being "the greatest family on earth" (whatever that might mean) or for being "better" than other families. You don't feel threatened when other people love their families the same way. On the contrary, you respect their love, and you take comfort in knowing they respect yours. You don't feel your family is enhanced by feuding with other families... nationalism, it has often been said, is grounded in resentment and rivalry... It is militant by nature, and its typical style is belligerent. Patriotism, by contrast, is peaceful until forced to fight.

The patriot differs from the nationalist in this respect too: he can laugh at his country, the way members of a family can laugh at each other's foibles. Affection takes for granted the imperfection of those it loves; the patriotic Irishman thinks Ireland is hilarious, whereas the Irish nationalist sees nothing to laugh about. The nationalist has to prove his country is always right. He reduces his country to an idea, a perfect abstraction, rather than a mere home. He may even find the patriot's irreverent humour annoying.
Patriotism is relaxed. Nationalism is rigid. The patriot may loyally defend his country even when he knows it's wrong; the nationalist has to insist that he defends his country not because it's his, but because it's right..."
Joseph Sobran, - October 31st, 2001


by Jeremy Lee
Pity the poor writer, scratching round between piles of political manure, trying to find something of meaning to say about this election! At the time of writing, with 10 days to go until polling day, the only desire which stirs the heart is the thought that it will end (although sometimes even that thought waxes faint). The sight of Costello and Howard kissing babies is nauseating; the news that the tax payout to any and all candidates receiving more than 4 per cent of the primary vote has been increased from $1.68 to $1.79 (it is now linked to the CPI figures) is a major factor for resentment; and the news that the Electoral Commission is still hunting down some 80,000 registered voters from the last election who failed to vote, is a cause for sympathy.

Last Federal election the amount of tax-money handed out to candidates topped $30 million. This time it will be much higher. What can one really say? If the 'khaki' election wasn't showing the first signs of a backlash, one could almost imagine the Prime Minister appearing on the hustings in camouflage uniform (with flak-jacket showing through); a sort of duck-billed Fidel Castro minus beard.
As far as the National Party is concerned, the whole campaign is built on pork-barrelling - better telephones, TV reception, medical services, etc. But nothing that could, for one moment, herald a turnaround in which dying centres gain new life, the number of family farms increases, and young rural people are given hope for the future.
It's all very sad.

In the Darling Downs electorate of Groom, the poster gaining most attention says simply "PUT LIBERALS LAST". It happens to be held currently by "Chainsaw" Ian MacFarlane, who played a questionable role in the rorting of the GST by Liberal Party funding schemes.

The best advice, if a return to the democratic process is considered essential, is NOT to vote for anyone who has sold out his conscience. Anyone acknowledging he will be voting "on party lines", whatever the rights and wrongs of the issue, has sold out.
Voting for such a character gives the go-ahead for such a sell-out.


A small article in The Weekend Australian (27-28/10/01) quoted one Christian leader with something to say:
"The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney has labelled the nation's politicians a 'despised cohort' and questioned if any people of quality were standing in the Federal election. "Addressing his first synod of nearly 800 clergy and lay representatives yesterday, Dr. Peter Jensen said there had been a serious decline in the past 30 years in the number of people standing for preselection in the major parties. 'The numbers have been slashed, the question now is are there sufficient people of quality offering?' Dr. Jensen asked...... "'We have a tendency to reward politicians and parties who reflect some of the worst features of our national life, not least our selfishness and lack of generosity to those in need,' he said "'A big factor in the dearth of quality candidates was the contempt for politicians expressed almost universally in the community. "'Who would want to join the ranks of such a despised cohort?' Dr. Jensen asked ....."

Well it's a start. But very late in the scheme of things.
Speaking of Britain, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Catholic Bishop of Westminster have both declared Christianity irrelevant as far as national affairs are concerned.


In a well-reasoned and hard-hitting article in Britain's Weekly Telegraph (24-30/10/01), Barbara Amiel argued the case for stepping up the existing war against Afghanistan, suggesting that western compromise was partly to blame for letting it get so far.

" .... If the Americans think that this problem can be solved, a la Kosovo, from the skies, without a proper land invasion, we are lost. This would make the war on terrorism another one of those causes for which it is worth killing, but not dying. .... Terrorists .... have made an open declaration of war on the military and civilians alike. Territories and states are at stake. The whole point about terrorism is that it cannot exist without state support. ..... You cannot have safe houses, financial instruments, passports, mobility, training camps, and indoctrination without states encouraging and permitting on their territory the establishment of terrorist organizations.
Hizbollah fires rockets into Israeli kibbutzim from the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. ..... How can a purely criminal organization have Katyusha rockets set up and fired into other countries without state support and acquiescence?
For tactical reasons, America has left Syria and Hizbollah off its list of terrorist organizations, but it is questionable that this will serve the morality of our cause or its ultimate success.....

"As a democratic western nation state, Britain cannot exempt itself from this war. If the forces of bin Ladenism succeed in taking over Islam, there is no country in the world that would be safe from an expanding and theocratic Islam. It will not be our bombs that bolster this happening, but our indifference and ineptitude ....."

Barbara Amiel went on to ask: ".... Even if you accept the proposition .... that fanatics exist because of the creation of Israel or the allied bombing of Saddam Hussein, what are we to do? Must we allow Israel to be swept into the sea, Saddam to conquer both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia .... Would this make the world more secure?" ....." This is a very one-sided scenario.

Barbara Amiel forgot to mention the documented and extensive terrorism applied by Israel to the Palestinians, from Deir Yassin to Sabra and Shatila. Nor does she mention the ever expanding Israeli settlements, strongly condemned by western nations, in Palestinian areas supposed to be the subject of peace negotiations. Barbara Amiel should read the incredibly well-documented Zionist Connection II, by Jewish author Alfred Lilienthal, for a picture of the enormous provocation applied to the Palestinians since well before the creation of Israel in 1948.
Men like Ariel Sharon and Menachem Begin have as much to answer for as bin Laden. Israel and its intelligence organization Mossad have as much to answer for as Hizbollah.

Nor is it true that the massive air raids unleashed on Kosovo have solved the problems in the Balkans; except, maybe, for the multinational syndicates interested in the minerals at Trebca and the massive oil deposits in the Caspian. Nevertheless, Barbara Amiel's point of view deserves consideration in any free country. But, so that they know who they are reading, it should also be explained that Barbara Amiel is Jewish, and married to Conrad Black, the media mogul who includes in his stable The Jerusalem Post.

The massive preponderance of Jewish editors, broadcasters and journalists in the western world is obviously quite lawful. But, when writing of Middle East affairs, their likely allegiances should be made known to the reading public. Western nations are under threat from both fundamentalist Islam and from Zionism - both in their own way messianic movements.

And what of Christianity? Well, leaders from both major denominations in Britain say it doesn't apply any more.


Lyndon Rowe, from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Western Australia, lamented in The Australian (26/10/01) that economic reform and globalism had been put on the back burner in this election.
" .... The sad fact is that, like Anderson, Kim Beazley and John Howard understand the benefits that the economic reform agenda has already delivered and can continue to deliver for regional and metropolitan Australians. But they have given up trying to win the argument, or stopped practicing what they have preached. "Sadder still is that their silence is taken as consent to the false claims about the intent and effect of reform peddled by those politicians, such as Pauline Hanson, Bob Brown and Natasha Stott-Despoja, who really don't understand how the economy works. "A popular consensus appears to be emerging that economic reforms haven't worked, and the reform agenda should be frozen or even turned back ....."

Rowe goes on to ask, if reform is so bad, why are prices for farm products at record levels? It is the same point made by people like Tim Fischer and John Anderson. The truth is that the only thing that saved the pork industry and sent prices soaring was the disastrous outbreak of disease in pig populations in SE Asia. Tens of thousands of breeders were slaughtered, creating at one hit an entirely new market for pig producers. To claim this as a victory for globalism is stretching it.
Beef prices have also soared - on the back of the massive slaughterings in Britain and Europe due to foot-and-mouth. As northern hemisphere farmers gradually recover, prices will fall. It has nothing to do with globalism or economic rationalism. On the other hand, dairy farmers and cane farmers have little to thank globalism for. Prices have never been so low. It appears Lyndon Rowe is the one who doesn't understand how the markets work.


There are a number of issues tied up with the report that the UK Home Office may charge those Uniting Kingdom Moslems - already in Afghanistan with the Taliban - with treason, should they try to return to the UK. Not least of the issues are multiculturalism, internationalism and dual citizenship or divided loyalties. The International Express, 5/11/01, revealed, "With Royal Marine commandos poised ready to go into battle, there are British fundamentalists on the ground ready to fight on behalf of the Taliban and Osama bin laden".


In the wake of the legal penalties being proposed against some UK Moslems by the Home Office, reference should be made to the actions of the UK cross-party group, "Subjects Against Nice Treaty". This active group is determined to use every constitutional and legal means to stop ratification of the European Union's "Nice Treaty" by Tony Blair's Fabian Labour Government.

In summary, through this Treaty, the European Union seeks powers to:
. set up a military force which will place British service personnel under its direct command
. restrict the free expression of political opinion
. permit the introduction of an alien system of criminal justice which will abolish the ancient British rights of habeas corpus and trial by jury
. allow onto British soil men-at-arms from other countries with powers of enforcement.

The presenters of the "Petition to the Queen" (reprinted with full story, in Heritage, Vol.25 No.97) seek to invoke the powers of Magna Carta 1215, and the Declaration of Rights 1688, in the battle for the sovereignty of their nation.

"These are all issues of major constitutional importance," warned Lord Ashbourne at an inaugural public meeting. "They directly threaten our rights and freedoms, and destroy the oaths of loyalty to the Crown sworn by Privy Counsellors, British armed-forces and the police. Such fundamental matters cannot be considered merely the stuff of day-to-day politics. They concern every British subject, and generations yet unborn.


"Finally," the report in Heritage informs us, "there is now the real possibility of direct legal action being initiated against Tony Blair and his ministers. Legal advice is currently being taken on whether or not they have committed treason. That too hasn't happened in over 300 years!"

In his review of Ashley Mote's book Vigilance, Anthony Cooney asks the question, "Why have we not specified the penalties of EU treason which will be exacted from both politicians and high-ranking officials when Great Britain is once more free? Those penalties ought to be plainly specified and it ought to be understood that they will be pursued against both the carcasses and estates of deceased traitors. There is plenty of room where Cromwell's skull stood on Tower Hill!"


Aren't Australians in the same boat? Don't the same principles apply to this country? Australians would do well to carefully consider the actions of the politicians in this country. To paraphrase Lord Ashbourne's letter to The Times, Australians could also say: "A government which has introduced a succession of Bills and Acts of Parliament which deal with various aspects of the Constitution needs to be reminded that they have no rights to exceed the powers vested in them. We the people own the right to our own property - in this case Australia. "Every three years we might be said to 'lease' its care to 'tenants' (parliaments) who have an obligation to look after our property and act in our best interests as the ultimate owners. "Our 'tenants' do not own the title to our deeds, nor any right of ownership over the property itself. They merely own the right of abode, and duty of care, for a maximum of three years. They are caretakers - no more."


by Antonia Feitz
Jeremy Lee commented on the increasing use of robots in the workforce. As he rightly said, given the proliferation of robots 'it's hardly likely that the "New Economy" is going to absorb the world's unemployed.' Lee's comment neatly brings us back to Viviane Forrester's questions recently reported in News Week. She asked, in an age where only a few need to work to produce the whole world's requirements, "Why is employment seen as a must?" and "Why not look for a mode of distribution and survival that would not depend on wages?" As she suggested, unless we find an alternative system, we're looking down the barrel of the horror where people will be exterminated for no other reason that that they are superfluous.

People and especially politicians have to understand that the problems of manufacturing and production have long been solved. The earth is awash, groaning with food and goods that people can't afford. It's absurd. Clearly what hasn't been solved is the problem of the distribution of the world's wealth. The twentieth century has proved beyond all doubt that communism and socialism are not the answer. So maybe it's an opportune time to present the idea of social credit to a new generation. The fact that orthodox economists deride social credit should commend the idea to our readers, especially the young.

Here's an example of social credit in action
The Alaska Permanent Fund was formed in 1976 to give all Alaskans a direct share of the profits their state government received from the Prudhoe Bay oil fields. By 1998, through property, stock market and other investments, the Fund was providing greater returns than the oil itself. Half of the Fund's annual income is distributed to the residents of Alaska as a dividend. For example in 1998, every man, woman and new-born baby in Alaska received a dividend of $US 1,300 (Australian Financial Review, 27-28/6/98). In 1998 that equated to $A2,151. On the Fund's profit sharing, a family of four would receive $8,604. A family of five $10,755.

It doesn't take much imagination to see how the distribution of such dividends to the citizens and their dependants would benefit the local economy. A very likely spin-off might even be that with increased financial security, women would again be willing to bear that longed-for and demographically important third baby.

Human frailty?
Where is the fault in regarding the taxpayers of a state as shareholders entitled to a dividend? That's how companies work, so why not a nation? After all, it's the people's taxes that financed the infrastructure. Why shouldn't they benefit from it? Multinational Scrooges and their tame governments will say people will 'waste' their dividends. And governments don't? Families and individuals could spend the dividend or they could save it, or invest it. Think of the entrepreneurial possibilities if people could look forward to some interest free start-up capital, financed from the existing wealth. Local economies would hum and more people would have the opportunity to work at what they enjoyed doing.

An economics professor at the University of Alaska, Dr. Scott Goldsmith, who initially warned that declining oil revenue and rising government spending would result in a fiscal gap, has repudiated his former view. He now says there's no reason the situation shouldn't continue forever. Nor is there - unless the Alaskan government treacherously privatises. Apart from sharing in the wealth of their state via a dividend, Alaskans pay no state income tax or sales tax. This system is the very opposite of socialism. It returns to individuals their proper share in the wealth of their state, to do with as THEY please.


The Annual Basic Fund has now been launched and we earnestly ask our supporters to get behind the appeal and help fill it as quickly as possible. The target will remain at the modest $60,000 target. Will you make every effort to help us fill the Fund in the shortest possible time?


Konrad Kalejs
Dear Sir, Craig Wood's photographs (Herald Sun, 24/10/01) of 88-year-old Konrad Kalejs being brought into the Federal Court on a stretcher are deeply disturbing. Quite plainly this man is far too ill, far too close to death, to be able to defend himself against the war crimes charges he faces. Yet he may be innocent.
Quite plainly mercy and common humanity have been overlooked with appalling results. It is hard to know which is more to be condemned: the fanaticism of the Jewish agencies which insisted on this case or the moral turpitude of governments, political parties and intellectuals who acquiesced in it. Yours sincerely, Nigel Jackson Belgrave, Vic.

Dear Sir, Adrian McKee (Ballarat Courier) realistically concedes that "many Australians are finding it difficult to save and even struggling to cover their living needs." Yet, strangely, he discusses compulsory savings and employer contributions to superannuation. If we are already struggling to make ends meet, compulsory savings will only exacerbate the difficulty. Employer contributions to superannuation increase the business costs which must be loaded into prices, further worsening the problem of making ends meet for the individual. Certainly retirement incomes are a time bomb ticking. Sooner or later it must be conceded that the economic rules are outdated. As the proportion of the population who have retired increases, neither taxation nor superannuation, as it is enacted by law, will provide for the retired. Unless a complete rethink of the economic framework is undertaken, incomes will continue to be a time bomb ticking to the point of total collapse. Yours truly, Ron Fischer, Talbot, Vic.


The League has a truly great feast of reading and information for its supporters.

SPECIAL PRICE FOR CHURCHILL'S WAR 2 - Triumph in Adversity: Please note the special price for Churchill's War Vol.2. is $75 including GST. The posted price is $80. Order from your State book service NOW. David Irving's "Churchill's War: Volume 2" was launched at The New Times Dinner. The first volume was published in 1987, and after an uneasy birth, the second volume appears 14 years later. The second volume narrates the middle years of World War 2. This work benefits from the release of thousands of secret files. Thus, says Irving, we now know more about Anthony Eden's role in the murder of Admiral Darlan. The human side of Churchill reaches boldly out - lively, incorrigible, sometimes callous - but meek and subservient to Moscow and Washington.

"Vigilance - A Defence of British Liberty": In his review of the book, Anthony Cooney poses the question, "Why have we not specified the penalties of EU treason which will be exacted from both politicians and high-ranking officials when Great Britain is once more free? Those penalties ought to be plainly specified and it ought to be understood that they will be pursued against both the carcasses and estates of deceased traitors. There is plenty of room where Cromwell's skull stood on Tower Hill!" $45 posted direct from your State bookmailing centre.


Please note, the address for MEA Tapes is still PO Box 184, The Basin, Victoria, 3154, until further notice. Single tape $10, four tapes for $25. Send for a list of current tapes.


November 27th - The last meeting of the year will give you the rare opportunity to be a speaker. Open to all members of the audience with a time limit of five minutes. Be prepared to answer questions. The cost of attendance is $4, a supper with some Christmas fare will conclude our evening. The meeting will be held as usual in the Estonian Hall, 141 Campbell Street, Sydney, commencing at 7.30pm. Books from the Heritage Bookmailing Service will be on display and for sale. The first meeting for 2002 will be Tuesday, January 29th, 2002.