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

5 November 1971. Thought for the Week: "To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
Lord Tennyson in Ulysses.


"But Britain's bumpy ride into Europe is not yet over. The size of last night's majority was a misleading pointer to the struggle to come as the Government tries to force the necessary enabling legislation through Parliament". - Peter Cole-Adams from London in The Age, Melbourne, October 30th.

The manipulation of the voting process to impose totalitarian policies under the label of "democracy" is now clearly a major threat to a disintegrating Civilisation. Following the UN vote to seat Red China in the UN and to expel Taiwan, Peking said that this vote was a "victory" for "the people" of the world. "The people" were, of course, not consulted. Neither did Prime Minister Heath of the United Kingdom bother to consult the British people before he managed to obtain, with the vital assistance of 69 Labor Socialists, a majority House of Commons vote in favour of the principle that the United Kingdom should join the European Economic Community.

In face of a massive and dishonest propaganda campaign which one British political observer said made the late Dr. Goebbels look like a "rank amateur", all the public opinion polls showed that on the eve of the House of Commons vote, a large majority of the British people opposed entry into the European Economic Community as compared with those who favoured entry. But a much clearer picture of opposition was provided when electors in a number of areas were provided with the opportunity to record their views at a referendum.

A referendum conducted in Mr. Heath's constituency just prior to the House of Commons vote showed a massive majority against Mr. Heath's policy. 71 per cent vote NO, only 29 per cent YES. Mr. Enoch Powell reminded Mr. Heath that he had no mandate for a policy of such far-reaching national significance and that Mr. Heath had stated before the last general elections in the United Kingdom, that his Government would not attempt entry into the E.E.C. without the full-hearted support of the British people and their parliamentary representatives. It has now been demonstrated that Mr. Heath's promise was merely a political gimmick designed to help win the elections.

Having won the elections, thanks in part to the strong campaigning of Mr. Enoch Powell for traditional Conservative principles, Mr. Heath then proceeded to drive towards his E.E.C. objective, attempting to mislead the British people while at the same time insisting that he was entitled under the "Sovereignty of Parliament" doctrine, to have the politicians make the decision on the E.E.C., not the British people.

In his Paper on The Essential Christian Heritage, given at the League of Rights Heritage Seminar on September 18th, Mr. Eric Butler pointed out that up until the time of the first World War, it was generally accepted that Christianity was part of the law of the United Kingdom, that irrespective of their parliamentary majorities, Governments were restrained in their actions by a higher law. This was part of the heritage, which came down from Magna Carta. Mr. Butler quoted an eminent British constitutionalist as warning that in theory uncritical acceptance of the doctrine of the "Sovereignty of Parliament" meant that once a Government obtained office, irrespective of how this was achieved, and how small the majority, it could do as it liked until the next elections, even passing a law to have all blue-eyed babies put to death.
Mr. Heath and his colleagues are applying this totalitarian concept of Government with their policy of putting British sovereignty to death.

Having ignored electoral opposition in order to win the opening round in the Battle for Britain, Mr. Heath is now hoping that by February the British economy will be starting to improve, and that the British people will have had sufficient time to get used to the fait accompli of the "vote of principle". The pro-Marketeers are now hoping that organised opposition to the proposed British betrayal will collapse. The British League of Rights, so ably directed by Mr. Don Martin, at present concluding a successful Canadian tour, now has the chance to move to the centre of the British struggle to ensure that British sovereignty is not sold in the Common Market place. The enabling legislation, which Mr. Heath must get through Parliament will reveal for all to see the magnitude of the surrender required. The Battle for Britain is just starting.


"But a glance around the European economic landscape is a disheartening experience for any British politician anxious to present the E.E.C. as a wonder world of opportunity. Germany's economic managers are trying to pick a narrow path along the ridge between price inflation and economic recession. With an growth rate below 2 per cent, rising wages and prices and falling profits, Germany seems destined for stagnation…The E.E.C. Commission, in a recent short-term outlook report, talked of deficient investment and a poor trade balance - the sort of picture that Britain used to present …Businessmen of all countries are uncertain". - Peter Smark from London in The Sunday Australian.

One of the most disturbing manifestations of the type of hypnosis afflicting mankind, is the almost universal view that problems can be best solved by making them bigger. The mania for greater centralisation, allegedly to gain greater efficiency stems from the same type of philosophical soil, which has nourished Marxism. If centralisation is to be successful then the spiritual nature of man must be ignored so that he can be treated as a mere statistical unit. But would centralisation be successful if man could be driven down the scale of existence to that of an animal?
The starting point for a realistic examination of all organisational questions, economic, political, financial or social is: What is the nature and purpose of man, and for what purpose do his organisations exist?

As we predicted from the beginning, the European Economic Community is inherently incapable of producing permanently stable social structures in which individuals can live in harmony. History has demonstrated, to those prepared to learn, that Marx and his followers, irrespective of what label they apply to themselves, have been proved correct with their insistence that each new step towards centralisation automatically produces more problems which are then used as the justification for still more centralisation. The process is taking place in Australia, in Canada, and in the U.S.A.

Writing in The Guardian, England, the economics writer, Mr. Anthony Harris, a dedicated Marketeer, deals with the growing problems inside the E.E.C., concluding that "If all goes as badly as the pessimists fear, there may be no E.E.C. to join - or no more than a ghost of the Old Community". Does this turn this economist, no doubt one of the "reputable" ones our politicians keep talking about, against the E.E.C. concept? Not at all: " . . .we will certainly want to help in its reshaping".
And there will be the Marxist Willy Brandt waiting, who warmly welcomed Mr. Heath's numerical victory in the House of Commons, starting that "It is a great day for the entire further development of the community". The German Chancellor knows where he is going, even if many others are just useful innocents.

The Common Market issue is now forcing the spotlight on to the basic issues confronting Civilisation at a time when it can no longer be denied that the centralisation road has now brought mankind to the brink of a disaster which dwarfs into insignificance what happened when the Roman Civilisation collapsed. The modern Communist barbarians are not only at the gates; their representatives are strongly entrenched inside. Real unity through genuine decentralisation and the flowering of individual initiative is the only hope for a regenerated Civilization. Perhaps the British could convert choirmaster Edward Heath to "practical Christianity", the foundation of all that has been best in European Civilisation?


"Canberra. - The Prime Minister (Mr. McMahon) has recruited the former Governor of the Reserve Bank, Dr. H.C. Coombs, as a special economic adviser…Dr. Coombs was not included in the official list of 13 advisers and personal staff accompanying Mr. McMahon on his mission...However, at his press conference yesterday, Mr. McMahon, in explaining his overseas engagements, said: 'I will be drawing on the assistance of Dr. Coombs - not in matters that involve him in the arts and similar matters, but as a kind of guiding philosopher - if there are any problems I feel he can make a contribution about'." - The Age, Melbourne, October 28th.

Before the Liberal-Country Party coalition came to office in 1949, speakers for these two parties had some harsh things to say about Dr. H.C. Coombs, regarding him as one of the most influential of the Socialists advising the Labor Governments. It would be instructive to hear the views of present-day Liberal and Country Party spokesmen on the Coombs appointment. Particularly interesting would be the views of Mr. R.L. Sparkes, President of the Queensland Country Party, who has recently contributed two full-page advertisements to Queensland Country Life (October 14 & October 21) in an attempt to answer the League of Rights. As most of the material can readily be demonstrated to have been prepared by Federal Government officials (some of it almost word for word what has appeared in letters from Ministers), it would be interesting to know whether the following was also prepared by the same officials, or by Mr. Sparkes.

"According to these people (The League of Rights), the pursuit of these (economic) policies is no mere accident or incompetent oversight, but is a deliberate technique of the 'Fabian Socialists'. The Fabian Socialists, so this hypothesis goes, are dominant among Government economic advisers and they are intentionally guiding the nation along an economic path that will lead to an increasing impoverishment of an increasing number of people, especially in the rural sector. This in turn will facilitate the centralisation of political power and the ultimate establishment of a socialist regime". In view of subsequent comment, the conclusion is that the League is rather "emotional", but weak on facts.

Those wishing to study the League's position should carefully study the booklet, They Want Your Land, (Price 37 cents, post free) in which there is a documented examination of the flow of ideas from the time of Karl Marx up until the present time. The League of Rights has never said that every economist, or economic adviser, is a formal Fabian Socialist. Not all have been to the notorious London School of Economics. Lord Keynes certainly never went there. But the dominant ideas of this century have had their roots in Marxism and their application has produced the world of crisis we now can no longer deny. Dr. H.C. Coombs, like Dr. Jim Cairns, and similar men now in positions of influence, was influenced by that catastrophe today known as The Great Depression.

The son of a radical father in Western Australia, Coombs studied at the London School of Economics under one of the most influential Marxists of this century, Professor Harold Laski. Laski described Coombs as one of his most "brilliant" students. The Marxist philosophy of centralism found full expression in the activities of Dr. Coombs as one of the most powerful of the Labor Governments' officials. He openly aligned himself with Dr. Evatt when this power-hungry man was making his bid to destroy the Federal Constitution under the cover of the war crisis. Dr. Evatt was a friend of Laski's, and Laski expressed great disappointment when his 1944 Powers Referendum was decisively defeated by the electors.
A leading figure opposing Dr. Evatt was a young man named Eric Butler.

It is no secret that it was Dr. Coombs and his powerful colleagues in the Federal bureaucracy who resisted successfully any suggestion that the Coalition's election policies of 1949 be implemented. In the middle 1950's, when the first seven-year term of Dr. Coombs as Governor of the Commonwealth Bank was coming to an end, there were some rumblings amongst Liberal and Country Party supporters. But Prime Minister Menzies, whose major Achilles heel was probably a lack of real understanding of finance-economics, stood firmly with Coombs and had him re-appointed.

As one of the major policy makers "advising" the present Federal Coalition Government, Dr. Coombs is one of those whose ideas have produced the present situation. Dr. Coombs is obviously a very special type of man, although those who recall the famous incident when he was prosecuted for lighting a fire in the open on a day of complete fire danger may wonder about his commonsense. Mr. McMahon says that his use of a retired official in an advisory capacity was "very unusual", but that "I value his advice very much. I've been able to use his advise to very good effect over the course of the past few months and I'll continue to use it".

Asked whether Dr. Coombs would be an "Australian Dr. Kissinger", Mr. McMahon said, "I will be using Dr. Coombs' advice in the future to a considerable extent".

With Dr. Coombs now the Prime Minister's "guiding philosopher", and the recent frank statement by former Minister Gorton that the present Liberal Party was not anti-Socialist, presumably electors are to have no choice at the next elections except the brand of Socialism offered. This is where the League of Rights comes in. And perhaps explains why the unity of some party politicians against the League.


The Use of Social credit

(continued) "Now the fact that the banker can increase or decrease the amount of money in circulation with results which, though they may be satisfactory to himself, are somewhat tragic to the community, has tended to obscure the fact that we have no record anywhere of a satisfactory distribution of consumable goods to the extent that they can be produced, except in a time of expanding capital production. To put the matter in its shortest possible form, we have no evidence that in modern times the price system is self-liquidating and every evidence to show that it is not.

"The theory of this proposition is somewhat complex and highly controversial, but the inductive proofs of it are endless. One of the more obvious is contained in the constant rise of debt, stated by the Technocracy Group to be at the rate of the fourth power of Time, one hundred years being taken as a unit.

Another equally conclusive indication of the immense excess of price values over purchasing power may be derived from examining assessments for Death Duties (probate) in Great Britain and elsewhere, in which it will invariably be found that an estate alleged to be worth let us say £100,000, and taxed in money upon that sum, consists only to the extent of two or three per cent in purchasing power, the remainder of the estate being assets of one kind or another which have price values attached to them, and require purchasing power to buy them.
It is significant that in England eight years are allowed in which to pay Death Duties.
It should be noticed that this confusion between assets having a price value placed upon them, and purchasing power, which is required to meet those price values (as if these, instead of being exactly opposite in nature, were similar) is one of the commonest sources of confusion in discussions of the money problem."
To be continued.

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