|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
8 September 1972. Thought for the Week: A people can "be vanquished by their vices as easily as by force of arms."
CANBERRA PROMOTES A QUIET REVOLUTION
"Canberra. - Quietly, without fanfare, the Federal Government has moved to involve itself permanently in another major field of education - that of teacher training. The new proposals have been almost ignored in the welter of Budget handouts. But they may prove to be among the most critical of the Government's pre-election education proposals, which also include major changes in its secondary scholarship scheme. - Michelle Grattan in The Age, Melbourne, September 2nd.
Most Socialists, including the National Socialists, have always supported centralised control of educational systems. Following the German pattern, the British Socialists strove relentlessly to break down the United Kingdom's traditional decentralised educational system. But they received powerful support from inside the Conservative Party. In Australia it has been the Liberal-Country Party Coalition that has breached the States' defences against centralised control from Canberra. The Labor-Socialists set the programme in motion, in the face of some rather half-hearted protests from the Liberal and Country parties when they were in Opposition before 1947.
Parents are becoming increasingly concerned about what is happening to their children under "progressive" education. The position is going to become worse as centralised control increases. For the period of 1967-73 the Commonwealth has made available $54 million in unmatched grants for capital projects in teachers' colleges. But the announcement by the Commonwealth Minister for Education, Mr. Fraser, in his Budget speech that the Commonwealth was going to provide finance for State teachers' colleges, which were being developed as "self-governing" institutions, now gives the Commonwealth a continuing commitment.
Michell Grattan aptly comments: "This is part of the widening Commonwealth responsibility in education which has always taken place on the basis of holding the purse strings, rather than any clearly defined constitutional power." This is the technique of Sovietisation by stealth. The Commonwealth power men are only providing finance for the teachers' colleges on the condition that they become autonomous and free from the influence of State Education Departments.
While education remained the responsibility of the States, parents had some opportunity of exerting influence on the type of education being received by their children. Increasing control from Canberra means less say for parents. It would be instructive to hear from Liberal and Country Party Members concerning this further step towards centralised control. What about Mr. Doug Anthonys renewed pre-election interest in decentralisation?
It is laughable that the Federal Members will exercise any effective control over a highly centralised educational system. A Government, which calls itself non-Socialist, has been handing out increasing amounts of the taxpayer's money to Universities that have been turning out an increasing flood of Socialist minded students. And there is the ABC. The Government has used huge sums of money to establish an institution in which large numbers of the staff devote themselves to advancing everything the present Government is supposed to be against and Government Members are quite helpless to do anything effective about it.
A Commonwealth Monopoly of education will mean the abolition of that little real education still remaining in Australia. It will mean a centralised brainwashing agency used to try to convince the young that every policy for centralising control of human affairs is not only "progressive", but is also democratic. We suggest that Mr. Fraser's totalitarian policies be subjected to some searching questioning during the Federal Elections. Government Members should be asked why they are implementing the very policy laid by the Fabian Socialists.
HAWKE THE HONEST SOCIALIST
Sydney - The Australian Labor Party is a socialist party ACTU president Mr. Hawke says. He had no respect for anyone who denied this. . Mr.Hawke was speaking at Belmont, a Newcastle suburb at the opening of the federal campaign for the seat of Shortland, in support of Mr. Peter Morris. Mr. Hawke said the Labor Party was a socialist-based organisation. - The Herald, Melbourne, September 4th.
At least Mr. Hawke is frank about his Socialism As he says, "I have never at any time tried to walk away from the fact that l am a dedicated and convinced socialist . .." However, he also admits that if "you went out tonight or between now and the next federal election and said you were going to bring in socialism you would not get in because, for too long, the people of Australia have been brainwashed into believing socialism is something evil."
The essence of Socialism is the centralisation of power. "Progressive Socialism ' means a step by-step advance towards the complete centralisation of power. Over the past twenty-three years a Government that describes itself as anti-Socialist has taken the Australian people down the Socialist road. Should the ALP be elected to office the process will be continued. It will also be continued should the Liberal-Country Party Coalition be returned to office - unless there is a strong electoral pressure which insists that a halt has to be called to all Socialist policies irrespective of the label of the Government.
Actionists can help to stimulate some possible "stiffening up" amongst Liberal and Country Party candidates by obtaining supplies of the League of Rights special publication. "The Liberal - Socialist Road To Serfdom" and distributing it. Send a small contribution to defray postal costs.
LEAGUE CAMPAIGNING PRODUCES SOME RESULTS
"The Liberal Party's rural committee yesterday put its seal of approval on a national rural bank to give farmers long-term-low-interest loans. The committee said adequate finance on suitable terms had to be made available for primary producers. Its decision represents a victory for the Country Party, Minister for Primary Industry, Mr. Sinclair, over the Liberal Treasurer, Mr. Snedden. - The Australian, September 4th.
League of Rights actionists can take most of the credit for the belated admission by both the Country Party and now the Liberal Party's rural committee that long-term, low interest credits would make a valuable contribution towards easing the financial pressures on the rural community. The League's specialist division, The Institute of Economic Democracy has spearheaded the nation-wide campaign on this issue.
There is also a growing admission that
no real attack on inflation is possible without the abolition
of inflationary indirect taxes and the introduction of a system
of consumer discounts. And Mr. Doug Anthony leader of the
Country Party, has become a convert to the League's policy
of stopping the sell-out of Australia in order to obtain foreign
capital. As the Federal Elections draw closer, so can the
pressure be increased on the candidates to sign some firm
contracts with the Australian electors.
WHAT ABOUT THIS BLACK RACISM?
"The South African Prime Minister (Mr.Vorster) said. . .today that the expulsion of British Asians from Uganda was 'the most immoral of acts." However, South Africa would not accept any of the Indians, he said, . . . . It was the responsibility of India a country that had through the years adopted "a pious, self-righteous" attitude towards other countries, and which had especially fanned world enmity towards South Africa." - The Age, Melbourne. September 4th.
If the South African Government deported its Indians, acting like Uganda, we shudder to think of the consequences. There would be a massive international protest campaign, South African Embassies would be stormed, and a special meeting of the United Nations would call for economic sanctions against South Africa. The Archbishops would wax indignant from their pulpits.
But apart from a little harmless wrist slapping, nothing has been done about the type of black racism being practised, not only by Uganda but also by other African States. Uganda was one of the nations that forced Rhodesia out of the Olympic games. It is high time for some straight talking to the African States. All of them are dictatorships of one type or another. There has been killing and corruption on a massive scale. It is also time for India to be told that instead of lecturing South Africa, it should open its doors to Indians being pushed out of Africa by black racism. The first responsibility of the European is to himself and to his own culture and Civilisation. He should refuse to permit himself to be blackmailed and bullied any further by the propaganda cry of "racism."
CONFUSION OVER DECENTRALISED GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION RIFE
"State Governments and existing local councils should be abolished, the new Mayor of Sunshine, Cr.Kevin Wheelahan. said last night." - The Age. Melbourne. September 5th.
Cr. Wheelahan, whether he knows it or
not, is producing the attitude to decentralised Government
which has been put forward more than once in the recent past
by Mr. Whitlam the Leader of the Federal Opposition. We see
great dangers in this attitude, which is one of political
centralism, in spite of its superficial appearance of the
reverse. Mr. Whitlam's expressed view is that the bulk of
the local councils outside of the Metropolitan area should
be amalgamated into regional councils, directly responsible
to Canberra. The big cities are to have some sort of special
governing council, in turn responsible to Canberra, the States
will be abolished. This is naked centralism.
The League of Rights absolutely rejects the concept of the principle of centralism in Government: Government should be as decentralised as possible at all times. Governments can increase their powers ONLY at the expense of the individual - the MORE power a government has the LESS power (control over his own affairs) has the individual! And the converse is equally true.
The complaint by those of the same mind as Cr.Wheelahan is that the many small local councils are necessarily inefficient, and that great savings in expenditure cam be gained through the "rationalisation" of staff, equipment etc, etc. The basic cause of the difficulties that Local Government, AND State Government suffer in their financial programmes is a direct result of their crushing and mounting debt burden. If it were not for this, Local and State Government would have no trouble at all in carrying out their duties, highly decentralised duties, in a most efficient manner, as has been the case in the past.
This is a model example of the axiom that the present finance-economic system is centralising; in the political and economic sense. Political entities are forced into larger units, as are economic entities, such as companies. The rash of takeovers and amalgamations currently distorting the business life of Capitalist Societies is proof enough of that.
To return to the financial difficulties of State and Local Government we are satisfied to reproduce figures on the Movement of Debt which were disclosed by the Prime Minister, Mr. McMahon, in the House last May, when he was answering a question from Dr. Everingham (A. L.P.) The Treasurer and other Members of the Government are given to making much of the fact that the interest burden on Commonwealth debt has, in point of fact, decreased not insignificantly over the past twenty years. This is true. But what these gentlemen do not make a point of telling us is that the interest paid on State debt has increased over the same period approx. 750% and the interest paid by Local Government has increased approx. 990% over the same period (20 years.)
Along with the general rate of inflation, this interest burden adds enormously to the cost structure, which must be borne by State and Local Government. For example, of each dollar of revenue collected by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works in 1970, no less than 62 cents went to service debt (14 cents repayment of principal, 48 cents interest on loans.) How can any organization such as this be expected to operate economically under this iniquitous burden?
Decentralised government is the only government to truly serve the individual. It is increasingly prevented from doing so because of the erosion of its sovereignty by the forces of financial debt. Those who ignore the reality of this and call for centralisation of government in the interests of "efficiency" are merely assisting the passing of democratic government.
ON TARGET BULLETIN
Statements By Banking Authorities on the Creation of Money
"In this way, by means of a loan, an advance, an overdraft, or by the cashing of bills, the banks are able to increase the volume of deposits in the community, and because of this process it is not correct to say that a bank loans out deposits which people make with it. It is clear that it creates the deposit by the issue of the loan; the loan travels back to the bank, or to another bank, and assumes the form of a deposit".
Sir R.Kindersley, C.B.E. (Director of Bank of England), in "Harmsworth's Business Encyclopedia":
"Deposits - Deposits of the commercial and private banks amount to about $2,000,000,000 but this large total has not, of course, been created by the deposit of actual cash, but has resulted in great measure from Credit created by the banks by the lending of money. The difference between actual cash in its own till, plus its balance at the Bank of England (i.e. Bank Reserves 10%-15'% of its deposit liabilities) which are Bank Reserves and the total, of the deposits, represents approximately the extent to which the Bank may be said to have manufactured deposits by the Creation and Sale of Credit (Money)."
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|