2008 Thought for the Week:
theory of a Communist Uprising seizing the power, then imposing a cultural revolution
through terror, Gramsci saw a different, lengthier path to the triumph of Communism,
making it impervious to the military coups. It was through a cultural hegemony
and invisible terror and censorship of the opposing ideas, where the screams of
the victims would drown in the deafening cacophony of propaganda from the media
The Gramscian trick was that Marxists would change the Culture first, then
political power would fall into their lap like a ripened peach. His was a "bloodless"
Communist Revolution, and its class struggle was the "position war"
for the minds and souls of the masses, alienated from their traditional cultural
It would be a tyranny, all right, but a tyranny of good intentions,
a tyranny the properly mind-programmed masses would eagerly embrace and support.
It would be for their own good and happiness. It would be a revolution whose achievements
are not going to be easily dismantled through a military force.
Eric D. Ross, Ph.D. "Collapse of Marxist Orthodoxy & Triumph of American
THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE PRESS FROM PETER DAVIS
The Prime Minister, Hon. Kevin Rudd MHR,
Parliament House Canberra 2600
Reserve Bank of Australia/Interest rate increase.
During the recent election campaign both you and Mr. Howard and
your respective treasurers clearly indicated that the R.B.A. is not directed nor
under the control of the Government of Australia; that it is independent of Government.
This means that for all intents and purposes yours is not the sovereign Government
It was Mayer Amschel Rothschild
who stated back in 1838, "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation
and I care not who makes its laws."
the issuance and control of money is the most important role of the national government,
not some private, autonomous body. Australia did once have a Government Bank.
Labor M.P. Andrew Fisher delivered the "People's Bank" in 1912, which for a few
short years delivered the people of Australia huge benefits under Sir Denison
It was conservative Prime Minister Stanley Bruce
back in the late 1920s who began the emasculation of the Commonwealth Bank of
Australia, completed by Paul Keating with the final full privatisation of the
Which brings us to today: The
two factors within the C.P.I. that have been identified as giving rise to inflationary
pressures are banking charges and rising fuel prices. Clearly the average wage
earner is not responsible for these pressures, yet he is blamed for causing 'rising
demand'. It can be predicted with absolute certainty that if the privately controlled
R.B.A. does increase interest rates this week many thousands of your electors
will suffer unfairly and unnecessarily.
Yours sincerely, P.W. Davis,
Port Lincoln S.A. 5606
comment: It has been reported the latest interest hike financially impacts on
300,000 ordinary Australian families.
TRUTH CAN SET US FREE
by Betty Luks
It much occupies my mind that many people find it hard to 'see' the Social Credit
that exists and has existed in all societies as long as people have lived and
worked together in mutual love and co-operation. It was a man named Charles Ferguson,
who, in the early 1900s, first coined the term social credit. He could see the
abundance and potential abundance of the western nations which he said had resulted
from the 'social credit' of the people. But it took Clifford Hugh Douglas' practical
mind to take the matter further and offer practical mechanisms, based on the social
teachings of the Christian Faith, for the just distribution of such abundance.
Social Credit is defined as:
power (the energy, the efficiency) of human beings in association to produce the
result intended, measured in terms of their satisfaction." Look around you reader.
Can you not see the incredible growth, increments and benefits, that have resulted
from the mutual associations of fellow Australians, past and present, that has
contributed to the physical and intellectual and spiritual benefits for modern
Australians? While the aim of most serious social crediters is to study and understand,
to the best of their individual ability, a limited number of matters, one being
the development and growth of a modern economy, (i.e., those things involving
a nation's housekeeping matters) the question of 'money' must come into their
consideration because all now live in a 'money' economy.
Social Credit asks:
What was, and still is, the true purpose of a 'money'
system? What does the study of the history of 'money' down through the centuries
reveal to us? What is the true purpose of a nation's money system? What is the
true nature of a nation's money system?
cannot people 'see' this thing called social credit?
The main reason
of course is that they are so indoctrinated with the perceptions and concepts
of the world of Mammon they cannot 'take in' any other perceptions and concepts
that differ from what they believe to be 'the real world'. They have accepted
an abstraction as part of reality, as real, and simply cannot see the real woods
and trees. Let me give some examples.
on the present 'financial crisis':
"Housing Flameout: California falls
into the sea". I ask: Really? Truly? In reality?
If I take that as
a literal statement, literal meaning: being or reflecting the essential
or genuine character of something, then I am to believe the land mass known as
'California', again a portion of the land mass known as the United Sates of America
- has fallen into the sea and the houses on it have fallen into the sea in a fearful
blaze of great intensity.
Or another headline:
"California Housing Falls Off a Cliff." Well that is clear - is it not?
Houses built too close to the edge of cliffs abutting the sea on a section of
the land mass known as California, have fallen into the sea.
what do you make of this statement?
"We are now beginning to see the first
signs that the listless housing bubble has sprung a leak and is careening towards
I imagine a house in the shape of a bubble, dispiritedly floating
in space, is now coming into view. Alarmingly, the bubble-house has sprung a leak
(air escaping?) and is careening, that is, lurking, reeling, towards earth. I
better watch out!
This abstraction called
'money' under present rules (and upheld by legislation) bears no relation to the
real world in which we live. But it must be made to appear that it does. Hence
the references to real things like the sea, cliffs, land masses, houses, even
bubbles. It is time you were dehypnotised.
THE ROMANTIC THEORY OF INFLATION
I regard the definition, "Inflation is too much money, chasing
too few goods," as the Romantic Theory of Inflation. It supposes either a degree
of intelligence exchange between retailers which simply does not happen, or alternatively
a uniform reaction of retailers to a measurable increase in public spending power;
which is to suppose a great deal indeed!
Romantic Theory of Inflation was a staple of U.K. Ministry of Information propaganda
throughout the last war. There was even a cartoon character who, observing two
people looking at the same article in his otherwise empty shop window, hastened
to change the price tag to a higher one.
much money chasing too few goods" became a mantra which is evidently still causing
us problems. Oddly enough nobody could find the "too few goods". Shop windows
and counters remained reasonably full and I have never met anyone who considers
that they have too much money!
In fact, the
fallacy was exploded in 1948 when Dior introduced the 'New Look' in women's fashions.
The ready-made clothing industry was faced with disaster, for, as quickly became
manifest, not merely the Department Stores, but also the Warehouses, were stacked
with clothing, withheld from the consumer by rationing, and not by "too much money."
Clothing coupons were abolished, literally overnight, by announcement on the B.B.C.
and the department Stores launched mammoth sales to get rid of obsolescent stock.
Realistic definition of Inflation:
what is the (C.H.) Douglas definition of inflation? It is "An increase in the
supply of money accompanied by an equal increase in prices."
is not a Romantic Theory, it is a mathematical theorem which can be demonstrated
by the A+B Theorem which shows that all costs (including taxation) must be recovered
in prices. Increased costs result in increases in prices as cause to effect.
C.H. Douglas was right or Douglas was wrong. If Douglas was wrong that does not
mean that either Keynes or Friedman were right. The results of implementing their
theories argue strongly that they too were wrong.
might be that everyone is wrong, which leaves us with the Copernican/Lockian theory
that money is a natural phenomenon, subject to the Laws of Nature as much as are
the wind and tides. In which case there is nothing anyone can do about it except
endure The Tragedy of Human Effort. Is there anyone who still propounds the Copernican/Lockian
Further essential reading:
Douglas' books and booklets.
Anthony Cooney's series on Social Credit.
D. Butler's booklets.
Send for a list from
your nearest Heritage Book Services and/or Veritas Publishing Company, W.A.
BILLIONS FOR ISRAEL WHILE AMERICAN CITIZENS
Bush budget launches new Israel
aid. Institute of Historical Review website 4/2/2008:
The Bush administration
launched its new $30 billion defence aid to Israel in its proposed 2009 budget.
The $3 trillion budget, released Monday, includes $2.55 billion in defence assistance
for Israel. That will increase in increments until 2013, when it will settle at
$3.1 billion a year until 2018.
year received its final $2.4 billion payment in a $24 billion defence assistance
package launched in 1998. The Bush administration increased the amount partly
as compensation to Israel for a planned $20 billion in U.S. arms sales to Saudi
Arabia and its Arab neighbours.
The administration defends the overall
package as necessary to contain Iranian hegemony and to spur Israel and moderate
Arab nations to support Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Who said America is not the tail of the Israeli dog?
KEVIN RUDD PM AND HIS 'COLLECTIVE GUILT' WEAPON
I must admit to wondering if Piers Ackerman has a personal dislike
of PM Kevin Rudd. Be that as it may, Mr. Ackerman has rightly brought up the question
of what strings will be attached to the Rudd Labor government's "gallop to claim
moral superiority over the previous Australian government with a pledge to say
sorry to a group of Australians, self-described as the Stolen Generations, in
a yet-to-be revealed form of words on behalf of the current government." (Daily
Not only is Mr. Rudd
posturing on the high moral ground in the affair, but he is pressuring the Opposition
leader Brendan Nelson to act in a bi-partisan manner and agree to the 'apology'.
Rightly, Mr. Achkerman refers to the ABC as the "Labor Party's electronic media
arm" which "has barely concealed its contempt for opposition politicians such
as the spokesman on Indigenous Affairs, Tony Abbott, for making the not-unreasonable
decision to wait to see what the Government proposes before issuing an endorsement."
Part of a Marxist agenda:
want to ensure Mr. Rudd clearly understands that not all Australians have been
conned into believing the 'apology' policy can claim the high moral ground. It
is, in fact, firmly historically based on Marxist manipulation of the Aboriginal
'land rights' movement as outlined in Geoff MacDonald's 1982 book "Red Over Black".
As for Mr. Rudd and his Fabian Socialist (read Marxist) government's psycho-political
crusade to bring down a mantle of collective guilt upon the shoulders of all decent
Australians let's make the matter quite clear to him.
If you agree, write
to your Federal Member and P.M. Rudd along the following lines:
and my fellow Australians, are not responsible for 'sins' claimed to have been
committed by previous generations of Australians against Aboriginal Australians.
We are not responsible for past generations' faults. We are responsible for our
own. You do not have my consent to vote (as my representative) in favour of the
Labor Party's 'apology'." That is enough.
Ackerman refers to "Rudd and his Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin have
attempted to assuage concerns in the community that any official apology on behalf
of the Government will not usher in a new round of handouts to those who believe
they are owed some compensation for the past policies of long-gone governments."
Marxist hardliners most certainly do have an agenda:
But make no mistake
about it. Not only do the hardliners hope to clog up the systems with compensation
claims but eventually to fragment the Commonwealth of Australia by setting up
a separate nation or nations.
In a preface to Geoff's book, former Victorian
RSL president Mr. Bruce Ruxton wrote:
"Mr. McDonald develop(ed) his central
theme that Australia's future as a free Western nation was seriously threatened
by two movements: one to use the Aboriginal 'land rights' issue to eventually
establish a separate Aboriginal nation under communist domination; and the second
to fragment a homogenous and stable Australia by a breaking down of the traditional
immigration policy, and by the deliberate fostering of a multiculturalism which
could only end with the Balkanisation of Australia."
me reader, have you looked at the racial mix in our capital cities lately? Do
you think 'Australians' now have a sense of homogenous cohesiveness? Have you
looked at what the landmass now known as 'Australia' would look like if only half
the land rights claims were granted and those lands 'hived off' for a separate
Marxist Aboriginal nation?
One wonders how long Communist leaders in such
land-hungry nations as China would let the 'Aboriginal' nations remain free on
this great land mass? A rich but weak nation would be a 'sitting duck' for such
I wonder how many Aboriginal Australians understand
what they are really being used for? They might have an inkling of what to expect
by taking a good hard look at what has happened to the continent of Africa. Would
they like to live under Marxist Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe? What about
Kenya - now a troubled Black nation under a brutal regime. What about Mbeki's
MacDonald's book "Red Over Black" available from all Heritage Book Services.
"Here We Go Again," by Douglas Collins. Doug Collins
was hounded by the thought police and wrote of his experiences to warn his fellow
Canadians of what to expect. $25.00 posted.
"Truth Out of Africa," by Ivor
Benson. $15.00 posted.
From David Flint's Opinion
"A Year with the Royal Family" triumphs and the Nine Network
wins the evening!
The interest in matters in our Royal Family is truly
extraordinary. And after years of republican propaganda. The evidence is in the
ratings last (Monday) night. 'A Year with the Royal Family' attracted 1.33 million
viewers across the nation.
This led the more serious programmes, 'Borderline'
with 0.989 viewers, 'Top Gear' with 0.799 and the return of Kerry O'Brien to the
'7.30 Report', with 0.657 viewers. Only the light entertainment on 10, 'So You
Think you Can Dance', attracted more, 1.616 million.
the republicans could counter this with some riveting series, say, about Australia
becoming a republic. What a pity this is the subject about which Malcolm Turnbull
indicated in 1999 is of absolutely no interest.
The programme showed something
which probably hundreds of thousands have experienced, a conversation with The
Queen. The film with Helen Mirren, The Queen, had already revealed an aspect of
Her Majesty which some did not know, and too many had forgotten - that sense of
duty which is the principle upon which she tries to lead her life. This episode
I predict that it will eventually be accepted, more and more,
that if Prince Charles has inherited anything from his mother and father, it is
precisely that same sense of duty.
Blanchet as the narrator was a clever move by the Nine Network. She was just right,
and not at all intrusive. Nine has been wise to buy this series for it clearly
answers a strong interest. Nine incidentally won the overall ratings last night.
The Nine Network had earlier indicated that it would use this series to spearhead
its return. Good Royal programmes do rate well.
insulting review...how to drive away your readers
And as to some of our
newspapers, why or why when they are reviewing programmes such as this, do they
choose a reviewer who obviously despises the subject of the programme? People
reading reviews want to know more about the programme, not a cursory and nasty
dismissal. Such was the TV review in The Guide from Sydney Morning Herald for
4 February, 2008. It is not the first time I have read a nasty review about a
programme on royalty.
One reader, contrasted
the graciousness of "all the Americans" to the Queen's visit portrayed in the
programme with the "gutter-level" and "gratuitously insulting" review by Tim Elliott.
"It made my skin crawl," he said.
Another reader said he would like to write
to cancel his subscription. He can't because he reads it on the web.
know people who have actually cancelled their subscriptions for similar reasons.
A frequent reason I hear is about the quality of the letters for publication,
or rather the lack of their quality.
are in bigger trouble than they admit. Go to the airports and hotels and see the
piles of free newspapers. Are they included in the circulation figures? Many newspapers
have in the past ridiculed monarchists on the ground of their alleged age.
that, they ridicule their own subscribers- not a wise thing to do when you have
a dwindling subscription base as a proportion of the population.
me of a photograph of a meeting of republicans I saw not so long ago. It was an
attempt to bring together supporters of the different models. It was certainly
not a meeting of youngsters, of the middle aged or even of the early retired.
And that is not a criticism of these good people. Just a reminder to some republicans
in the media. Be professional.
from Philip Benwell
is National Chairman of the Australian Monarchist League:
"We need to keep
a close watch on the lead up and agenda of the 2020 Summit of 1000 people to be
called together in April by Prime Minister Rudd, particularly since it will be
discussing: 'Government: renewed democracy, a more open government (including
the media's role), the structure of the federation, and citizens' rights and responsibilities.'
Whilst a republic is not specifically mentioned,
'the structure of the federation' is. Furthermore a spokesperson for Mr Rudd has
said: "if people wanted to put the republic issue forward it would be discussed."
May I also urge your readers to apply to your
Federal Member of Parliament for a picture of The Queen and a copy of the Constitution.
Whilst some republican MPs will refuse to service requests of this nature, it
is nevertheless hoped that this will provide an impetus to the Government to continue
producing these two items."