Australian Family Party

Family Matters

Culture Wars

Cult Fiction

by

cult-fictionA fourth-year medical student had just finished top of his class at university.

His parents were so proud of him they gave him a holiday in Nepal for a month-long trek to clear his mind and prepare him for his next year’s study.

While in Nepal the young man met an Indian guru who told him of the futility of Western society and culture – always striving for success and being dependent on someone else’s failure so you can be successful. “That will never make you happy”, the guru told him. “Give up all this competitiveness and come and live with us in a community where we all love each other and where no-one is trying to take anything away from anyone else.”

The young man had finished five years of private schooling and four years of university and was ripe for this kind of influence.

He rang his parents from Kathmandu and said he was dropping out of medical school and going to live in an Ashram.

You can imagine how pleased they were to hear this.

Six months later they received a letter from their son:

“Dear Mum & Dad
I know you weren’t pleased with me for dropping out of medical school, but I can’t tell you how happy I am. For the first time in my life, I feel good about the way I’m living. I’ve got the poison of competitiveness out of my system. This new way of life is so in harmony with the essence of my inner being that in only six months I’ve become the No 2 disciple in the whole Ashram, and I reckon I’ll be the No 1 disciple by the end of the year.”

Irony and self-awareness were clearly not the lad’s strong suits.

The late Rabbi Sacks wrote, “Those who are naïve about human nature find themselves disappointed again and again.

“Revolutions, protests, and civil wars continually take place because people think that removing a tyrant or having a democratic election will end corruption, create freedom and lead to justice and the rule of law. People are surprised and disappointed however, when that does not happen. All that happens is a change of faces in the corridors of power.”

After the French Revolution, Napoleon was more dictatorial than Louis XVI. After the Russian Revolution, Stalin was far more brutal than the Czar, and after the Cultural Revolution, Chairman Mao was more autocratic and murderous than any of the Emperors of the Chinese dynasties.

Each of these tyrants – Napoleon, Stalin and Mao – as well as fomenting anti-sovereign hatred – also held a deep hostility towards God:

“We will never be free until we strangle the last king with the guts of the last priest”, proclaimed French philosopher Denis Diderot.

Charming.

As with our young man in the Ashram, what the people who support these tyrants naïvely overlook is the inability of human beings to prevent the abuse of power and position once it has been attained.

The threats to Australia – and the Western world – are not climate change or health epidemics or economic instability, they are in the slow takeover of every aspect of our lives by those who seek more and more power over us.

What we are witnessing is the ascension of a new authoritarianism.

“Know everything in order to control everyone,” said Adam Weishaupt.

And technology and mass surveillance will allow governments to do just that – know everything.

The State is accumulating more and more power – all, of course, in the name of ‘fighting crime’ or ‘public health’ or ‘protecting children’ or ‘social cohesion’. Yet it always turns out the same – a compliant and submissive population.

The Commonwealth Parliament, supported by both major parties, has just rammed through the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Act 2026.

As Liberty Itch’s Steve Holland reports, “The subsequent political fallout for the so-called ‘Liberal’ Party comes as no surprise.

“The Liberal Party is no longer the liberal political movement it once claimed to be. Justifiably, the Nationals aren’t interested in a coalition partner that has abandoned its principles by supporting laws that are completely antithetical to its stated values and platform.

“It is a bitter betrayal by those who claim to safeguard our liberties. While primary blame lies with the Labor Government for concocting such appalling laws, the Liberal Party’s complicity is especially disgraceful given its supposed commitment to free speech and individual freedom. As is often the case, hypocrisy amplifies the backlash.”

In England, zone restrictions have been introduced preventing motorists from driving from one part of town to another.

In Holland, banks are tracking what people spend their money on with a ‘carbon emissions summary’ – from food to airline tickets to petrol – noted on their receipts.

In Australia, smart meters are being used to control people’s power usage remotely.

What you buy, what you say, where you go, how much power you use …

Sig Samuel wrote, “This is religion minus all the God stuff. These atheists are more religious than Christians!”

The State, its gurus and high priests every bit as dogmatic and dictatorial as you’ll find in any sect, cult or Ashram, has become the new religion.

We must stand firm.

Thank you for your support.

Which is Witch in ’26?

by

witchIn Act 1 of Shakespeare’s great play Macbeth, the three witches appear before Macbeth and his friend Banquo. The witches predict that Macbeth will be king, and that one of Banquo’s sons will also be king one day.

Banquo is not convinced and responds, “If you can look into the seeds of time and say which seed will grow and which will not, speak then to me”.

Echoing Banquo, as we start another year, let us ask ‘who can look into the seeds of time’? Who can predict the future?

None of Banquo’s sons became king.

As with the witches in Macbeth, today’s economic forecasters, weather forecasters and social/population forecasters get it wrong time after time.

We are inundated with pundits’ predictions of what to expect in the year ahead.

Australia’s political pundits are predicting that in 2026 Labor will win both the South Australian and the Victorian State elections, Andrew Hastie will become Liberal leader, that house prices will continue to rise, and that there will be not just one, but several interest rate rises in 2026.

It’s been said that politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and then applying the wrong remedies.

They are similar to the guy who, when he smells flowers, looks around for a coffin.

As one wag put it, ‘In politics, if it’s honesty you want, stick to horse racing’.

So many predictions turn out to be wrong.

At the start of 2025, for example, Bitcoin was sitting at US$94,000 per coin.

Leading international analysts Standard Chartered, Bernstein Research and VanEck all predicted a rise in value in 2025 to somewhere between US$120,000 and US$250,000!

It is currently sitting at US$87,000.

Instead of rising 100 per cent or more, it dropped 7 per cent.

Other predictions have also proven to be spectacularly wrong – think ‘the internet will be a passing fad’, ‘online shopping will never take off’, ‘interest rates won’t rise for the next two years (they went up 13 times in a row), ‘Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis’, ‘global warming is so baking the Earth that even the rain that falls won’t fill our dams and river systems’, ‘2009 may be the Arctic’s first ice-free year’ (in 2009 Arctic ice was around 5 million square kms, the same as it is today).

As someone wryly observed, ‘Ice doesn’t lie, but climate scientists do’.

Upping the ante, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres stated, ‘The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived”. 

You get the picture.

When it came to Covid, politicians, public sector bureaucrats, pharmaceutical company executives, the media – all in cahoots with one another – were all wrong on lockdowns, border closures, school closures, masking, and even the vaccines themselves.

While we here at the Australian Family Party are not going to get into making predictions about what may or may not happen in 2026, we can clearly see what has been unfolding globally.

As discussed in previous posts here, here and here, Australia – and South Australia in particular, given its similar climate and topography to Israel – would benefit enormously from a much closer relationship with Israel.

Israel is a nuclear and intelligence superpower with the will and ability to project power across vast distances. The Bondi massacre would not have happened had we availed ourselves of that intelligence.

Similarly, if we want to have a strong enough economy that can build a strong enough military to be able to withstand looming regional threats, then we are going to need to abandon the obsession with useless forms of energy generation, such as wind and solar.

At the Australian Family Party:

We like …
South Australia, Australia, Farming, Mining, Small Business, Free Markets, Free Speech, Property Rights, Home Ownership, School Choice, Income Splitting, Traditional Family Values, Pro-life Policies, Low Immigration, Australia’s Defence Forces, Israel.

And we dislike …
Big Government, Big Business, Big Unions, Rent Seekers, Wind Turbines, Solar Farms, Green Hydrogen, Net Zero, The Voice, Toxic Algae, Ambulance Ramping, Urban Growth Boundaries, $50bn State Govt Debt, Digital ID, High Immigration, High Crime Rates, Transgender Ideology, The UN, The WEF and The WHO.

Standing Guard
If Parliament House were a night club, they’d have a bouncer on the door only admitting those who would add value. Undesirables would be turned away!

Walk …. Get Fit …. Go Letterboxing ….
As we often say, it’s one thing to have an opinion – it’s a very different thing to support a cause.

And our primary aim now is the South Australian State election.

It’s summer, so what better time to get fit, go for a walk …. and do some letterboxing.

Can you help?

If you would like to do some letterboxing, please let us know here (choosing ‘Admin’ as the recipient).

Happy New Year everyone and thank you again for your support.

Never Again?

by

never-again“Every person who has participated in a pro-Palestinian march, every university campus, every politician who marched over the Sydney Harbour Bridge in lockstep with Islamist fanatics, every single media commentator who has echoed some kind of sympathy for the Islamist, pro-Palestinian cause has blood on their hands today.” – Rowan Dean

History is repeating itself before our eyes.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born, Dutch American activist and former politician has spoken about how, “a story is also a moment when you are forced to make choices.

“I think we find ourselves today, right now, in a moment where we have to make a moral choice. I sit here today and say I support Israel. No ifs. No buts. Unequivocal.”

There is only one side to take in all this – the side of the Jewish people.

No ifs. No buts.

As we know, the easiest position in any conflict is to ‘both sides’ the problem – the moral equivalence game. Australia’s Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, plays this game all the time.

What we are now witnessing, in real time, is a clash of civilisations, a clash of cultures. A war between the civilised and the uncivilised, and only one can be allowed to win.

In Australia, the rupture was triggered by the October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel. Two days later, after the slaughter of over a thousand Jews, and before there was any response from the Israelis, hundreds gathered in front of the Sydney Opera House and chanted “gas the Jews”.

And the Albanese Government did nothing about it.

And off it went, like a wildfire.

Since October 7, the Albanese Government has condemned Israel, recognised Palestine, increased funding to the Hamas-controlled UN agencies in Gaza and imported thousands of Gazan ‘refugees’.

There’s no doubt whatsoever which side the Albanese Government is on.

Australia has joined the club – and should anyone doubt what comes next, we have only to look at Europe. This problem will continue to grow until it takes over our country.

Let me close this sad missive with a quotation from one of A.E. Housman’s poems in which he invokes a profound sense of loss for a bygone era:

‘Into my heart an air that kills
From yon far country blows
What are those blue remembered hills
What spires, what farms are those?
That is the land of lost content
I see it shining plain
The happy highways where I went
And cannot come again.’

 

 

The 44% Alarm Bell

by

democracyIt’s been said that ‘Optimists learn English, pessimists learn Chinese, and realists learn how to use an AK47.’

We’re probably not quite at that stage just yet but it is good to be reminded as to how and why we are not.

Above the Courts of Justice in London stands a statue of Jesus. It is there to signify the Common Law’s origins in Christianity.

When the King is presented with the Bible, these words are spoken: “To keep your Majesty ever mindful of the law and the Gospel of God, …. we present you with this Book, the most valuable thing this world affords. Here is wisdom; this is the royal law; these are the lively oracles of God”. Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury (1207-1228) helped write the Magna Carta, the world’s pre-eminent document on human rights which forms the basis of so many of our laws.

A recent Report (November 2025) published by Flinders University, Turning Away from Democracy? Democratic Antipathy and Support for Undemocratic Practices Among Young Australians, found that only 56 per cent of young Australians (18–29) believe democracy is the best form of government. That 44 per cent of young people do not believe it is the best form of government is alarming to say the least.

Some of its other findings are equally alarming. For example, 38 per cent of young Australians support ‘the use of force to prevent policies they disagree with from being enacted’; 39 per cent agree that ‘the government should be able to bend the law when required’; 36 per cent agree that ‘the Prime Minister should be able to ignore court decisions’; and 25 per cent support ‘committing voter fraud to prevent a party they dislike from winning’.

When our system of government is being questioned in this way, it is timely to consider some of the world’s alternatives. Writer Evan Thompson provides a useful summary:

  • Theocracy. A form of government in which a specific religious ideology determines the leadership, laws and customs of the country. Iran is the world’s largest theocracy in which the Ayatollahs — Shiite religious leaders — rule the country and implement Islamic Sharia law. Iran has immense influence on several neighbouring countries.
  • Military Dictatorships. Rule by a single authority with absolute power and no democratic process. Installed by the nation’s armed forces, military dictators dismiss due process, civil liberties, and political freedoms. Dissent or political opposition is banned by the ruling military junta. Examples include Myanmar, Sudan, Chad and Mali.
  • Monarchy. Not to be confused with Constitutional Monarchies such as our own, ruling monarchies have a person as head of state for life, a position passed down through a succession line related to one’s bloodline and birth order within a ruling royal family. Today’s monarchies include Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Oman.
  • Communism.  A centralized form of government headed by a single authoritarian political party. Total control of the economy and of production, labour, goods, property and natural resources. Communist countries include China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam.
  • Totalitarianism. A form of government in which the ruling party sets no limitations whatsoever on its power. Its citizens are completely subservient to the state. A single figure often holds power and maintains authority through widespread surveillance, control of the media, intimidating demonstrations of military or police power, and suppression of protest, activism, or political opposition. North Korea is an example of a totalitarian state. Any criticism of the supreme leader is punishable by death.
  • Authoritarianism – a lesser form of totalitarianism in which an authoritarian government rejects political plurality and uses strong central power to preserve the status quo. Authoritarianism pays little regard to the rule of law, the separation of powers between parliament and the courts, or democratic voting. Much of Central and Eastern Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean falls into this category.

Of the 193 countries in the world, 153 of them are governed by one of these non-democratic systems. Barely 40 countries in the world are functioning democracies. And of those 40, 36 have a Judeo-Christian heritage and the other four (India, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan) had strong Christian/Western influence that led them to democracy.

The link between Christianity and stable democracy is obvious and sometimes we need to remind ourselves of Christianity’s great contributions to the world.

The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks said, “To defend a country you need an army. But to defend a free society you need families, schools and an educational system in which ideals are passed on from one generation to the next, and never lost, or despaired of, or obscured. It is not difficult to gain liberty, but to sustain it is the work of a hundred generations. Forget it and you lose it.”

Thank you for your support.

 

Shelter from the Storm

by

ShelterBob Dylan’s soulful ballad from his 1975 album Blood on the Tracks provides a helpful guide to where we finally might be heading on climate change and renewable energy.

First, let me state that ‘climate change’ is real. Taking action on climate change, however, is not.

The pain, the angst, the disruption, the cost associated with ‘taking action on climate change’ can all be summed up in two words – reducing emissions. CO2 emissions in particular – from power generation, transport and farming.

In the name of ‘reducing emissions’, Australian and international renewable energy merchants – corporate parasites who manipulate the political process to extract money from taxpayers and consumers – have leapt onto the ‘climate change’ bandwagon and have raked in billions of dollars by gaming the system, raising energy prices, impoverishing consumers, fleecing taxpayers and destroying jobs.

Phrases such as ‘subsidised renewables’ simply mean taking money from low-income people in the form of taxes, charges and higher electricity prices, and giving it to the renewable energy merchants.

They are a scourge. They tarnish the political process, distort the market and in the case of energy, distort the entire economy.

Renewable energy is probably the biggest scam the world has ever known.

Most scams target naïve investors who, when they lose their money, have only themselves to blame. The renewable energy scam, however, has been perpetrated by governments, with consumers and taxpayers the hapless victims.

The scam uses every trick in the book including fear – “the earth will become uninhabitable” –  to emotional blackmail – “think about your children’s and grandchildren’s future”. It is reprehensible.

Over the past 20 years, an entire false economy has developed fuelled by ‘Renewable Energy Targets’, ‘Emissions Trading Schemes’, ‘Emissions Reduction Funds’, ‘Renewable Energy Agencies’, ‘Climate Change Authorities’ and so on. Wind farms, solar farms, giant batteries, pumped hydro, green hydrogen, clean hydrogen, green steel, carbon capture and storage … one day this whole racket will collapse, and someone will write a book called ‘50 Years of Madness: How the World was Conned’.

How a tiny, harmless natural part of the environment has been used to spook the masses and undermine our entire way of life is going to be a question for the ages.

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is not dirty; it is not harmful.

CO2 levels in the atmosphere have indeed risen but they are not harmful to either humans or the climate. In fact, elevated levels of CO2 have increased crop yields and vegetation growth.

As Thomas Huxley, the famous biologist once said, “Many a beautiful theory was killed by an ugly fact”.

Or this from author Khaled Hosseini, “Better to be hurt with the truth than comforted with a lie”.

As for the science of climate change, it is nowhere near settled.

For every scientist who says CO2 is a problem, there’s a scientist who says it isn’t.

Friends of Science, a Canada-based non-for-profit organization comprised of more than 500 active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals, has written to the United Nations telling it there is no climate emergency. Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in its letter:

  1. Natural as well as anthropogenic (man-made) factors cause warming.
  2. The warming is far slower than originally predicted.
  3. Climate policies are relying on inadequate models.
  4. CO2 is not a pollutant – it is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth.
  5. More CO2 is actually beneficial for nature; it greens the Earth and is good for agriculture.
  6. Global warming has not increased the incidence or the severity of natural disasters.
  7. Climate policies must respect scientific and economic realities.
  8. There is no climate emergency; therefore, there is no cause for panic.

Clearly, there is not a man-made climate crisis, yet we are being forced to pay ridiculously high prices for electricity even though we know that high power prices kill people, particularly older people.

Even if emissions were a problem, which they are not, attempting to reduce them comes at a huge cost for absolutely no benefit.

China, India, Russia, the United States and all the developing world are not reducing their emissions.

Around the world, hundreds of new coal-fired power stations are under construction.

The world is not walking away from coal. Or gas.

Yet, here in Australia, we have both major parties calling for net zero emissions.

Australia is not going to stop exporting coal and gas to feed power stations in other countries, but somehow burning coal and gas in those countries is different from burning them here. Go figure.

In any event, if renewable energy is as cheap and as reliable as has been claimed, then why does it need legislation and subsidies to prop it up?

In summary, the only rational approach to climate change is to do what mankind has always done – adapt.

If human beings can adapt and live comfortably in cities such as Helsinki, Finland with temperatures of minus 5 degrees or in Phoenix, Arizona in the United States with temperatures of plus 35 degrees – a 40-degree difference – then we can certainly adapt if temperatures do in fact increase by 1 or 2 degrees. As for melting ice caps, temperatures in the Arctic and Antarctic average minus 40 degrees. A 1- or 2-degree change is not a crisis.

If we wish to have a strong enough economy that can build a strong enough military to be able to defend ourselves against looming regional threats, then we are going to need to abandon this obsession with useless forms of energy generation, such as wind and solar.

The Australian Family Party hereby calls for the abandonment of ‘Net Zero’ and the repeal of all climate change and renewable energy legislation.

On Wings of Eagles

by

abortionIn a recent Liberty Itch article on abortion, the clinching argument was that being pro-choice regarding the Covid vaccine made the pro-life position on abortion hypocritical. I disagree.

Although prioritising individual liberty, libertarians also recognise that there is a role for government in protecting individual rights and property. Abortion, which has impacts on the mother, father and unborn child, therefore falls well within the ambit of libertarian discussion.

The matter of vaccination is a largely personal one – doubly so when the vaccine has not undergone normal medical trials to establish safety and efficacy.

Governments chose to indemnify drug companies from any negative outcomes as a result of the use of their Covid vaccines, a move that was as irresponsible as it was outrageous. These decisions further strengthen the argument for personal choice and autonomy.

On the matter of abortion, women indeed have a choice. They can choose to abstain from sex, thus avoiding any pregnancy. Alternatively, they can use contraceptive measures to significantly reduce the likelihood of pregnancy. The argument that a woman’s right to kill her unborn child is ‘empowering’ equates to the use of abortion as a convenient post-conception contraceptive.

The utilitarian argument, using abortion to reduce poverty and suffering, is also unconvincing – summarised neatly in the statement that a woman “should have the right to remove it, just as someone has the right to remove a guest from their property”.

As any property owner knows, removing a squatter or tenant who refuses to pay rent is far from simple, as the law is at pains to protect those who may be vulnerable. Further, any owner who evicted a squatter, tenant or guest while knowing that eviction would lead to their immediate death would surely risk being charged with manslaughter, if not murder.

If the utilitarian position is a reasonable one, then throwing an unwanted pet out of a car in a snowstorm is also perfectly acceptable.

Unsurprisingly, and very fortunately, making anything a crime does attract government coercion. I may not agree with the law, but I do expect the government to enforce any law it passes. On the other hand, as we know all too well, banning something does not mean it does not occur.

The argument that “It is wrong to violate the bodily autonomy of one person to keep another alive” acknowledges that the unborn child is a person. The pro-choice position then seeks to justify the unborn child’s murder on the basis that it violated the ‘individual rights’ of the mother, whose rights outrank the unborn child’s life.

If we are to accept that the ‘rights’ of one individual trump the ‘rights’ or, more importantly, the life of another, then this suggests that a hierarchy of individuals can be established for all individuals in our society. It also means an unborn foetus has the same right to life as the woman in which it is located.

By the same logic, should we kill recidivists to supply life-saving organs to more worthy persons?

Pregnant women can, of course, avoid the impact and responsibility of raising a child by placing the baby up for adoption.

The pro-choice argument for bodily autonomy once the woman has become pregnant also doesn’t hold water.

Imagine a pilot who decides halfway through a flight that they no longer wish to be a pilot, or a surgeon who decides halfway through surgery that they no longer wish to operate.

As a society, we expect people charged with responsibilities to discharge those responsibilities with all due care. A pilot or surgeon is at liberty not to commence a flight or operation, and to cease performing those functions when it is safe to do so. In a similar vein, a pregnant woman is responsible for the safe care of her unborn child and should be obliged to fulfil those responsibilities until that child can be safely delivered to the care of others.

We can all agree that men and women should be able to choose whether or not to have a child, or whether or not to keep a child after birth. What I cannot agree with is ending a child’s life simply because it is convenient for the mother and/or father. Even if the child is conceived as a result of rape or incest, or due to contraceptive failure, convenience is not a sufficient reason.

In South Australia last year, a bill was introduced into the parliament requiring that women who choose to terminate a pregnancy after 28 weeks induce the child alive, not stillborn. After 28 weeks, with proper care, babies are viable outside the womb.

The bill did not prevent women from terminating their pregnancies, it only insisted that the baby be born alive, not euthanized and be born dead.

Presumably, as the woman was planning to abort the child, giving the child to a loving couple to adopt would not be opposed. This would have given rise to a significant number of new adoptions.

The bill was defeated 10 votes to 9 in South Australia’s Upper House.

As a woman’s ‘right to choose’ a termination was not being compromised, why anyone would oppose saving the life of the child when it was going to be aborted anyway is beyond me.

Our laws are distinctly uneven when it comes to the issue of abortion.

On the one hand, they allow mothers to decide the fate of the child without the father’s input. On the other, if the mother decides to continue with the pregnancy, despite the father wanting an abortion, then the father remains responsible for the provision of child support.

In this regard, the silence from pro-choice feminists is deafening.

Personally, I would argue that the entire pro-choice abortion argument is a hypocritical house of cards.

For example, in 2009, a bill called ‘Zoe’s Law’ was introduced into the NSW Parliament that aimed to recognize the death of an unborn child as a separate offence – particularly in cases where the loss of the foetus was caused by a criminal act against the mother.

Named after Zoe Donegan, an unborn child who died in 2009 after her mother, Brodie Donegan, was injured in a car accident caused by a reckless driver, the case sparked debate about whether the legal system adequately addressed the loss of an unborn child in such circumstances.

The bill was eventually watered down and became the ‘Crimes Legislation Amendment (Loss of Foetus) Act 2021’ and is now the operative law in New South Wales for addressing the loss of an unborn child due to criminal acts.

Finally, our society prosecutes people for damaging the eggs of endangered eagles or nesting sites while celebrating human abortions, all while human birth rates continue to fall below replacement rates.

Thank you for your support.

 

Life Lessons from Les Mis

by

les-misWhen the great French novelist Victor Hugo was in his 80s, he reflected on his life with the words, “I am like a forest that has been continuously cut down; yet each time I am cut down, the new growth has more life than ever”.

Hugo’s writings reflect his understanding of Biblical truth – that we are ‘continually and always being sanctified’ (Hebrews 10:14).

His epic novel, Les Miserables, embraces themes of crime and punishment, law and grace, sin and repentance, love and redemption.

As most will recall, the main character in the novel, Jean Valjean, is convicted of a petty crime and is imprisoned. He manages to escape before completing his sentence and begins to lead a bitter and resentful life. When he is treated kindly by a local bishop he repays the bishop’s kindness by stealing from him.

He is caught, but instead of pressing charges, the bishop vouches for him and invokes the words of Jesus, telling him to ‘go and sin no more’.

This is grace, unmerited favour, and it has a profound effect on him. His life, having been cut down, re-grows with love and ‘more life than ever’.

Valjean’s antagonist throughout the story is the ruthless and unforgiving policeman, Javert.

As US cleric Bishop Robert Barron puts it, ‘If Valjean represents grace, Javert is the embodiment of the law’ – harsh and unyielding.

Ultimately, Javert, being the proverbial Pharisee, cannot handle Valjean’s act of grace towards him and takes his own life.

This theme of law and grace permeates the Bible.

Jesus, for example, was crucified between two thieves.

These two thieves represent the two types of people in our fallen world: those who accept God, and those who reject Him.

As recorded in the gospels, both men speak to Jesus.

The first thief to speak represents those who reject God, “Aren’t you supposed to be the Christ? If you are, then save yourself … and us!”

No contrition, no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility for his crimes.

The second thief then rebukes his accomplice, “Don’t you fear God? We’re being justly punished for our crimes, but this man has done nothing wrong”.

The second thief takes responsibility. He doesn’t blame others. He admits he’s a sinner and is redeemed.

This is at the core of what has gone wrong with the world in which we now live.

As described in my last newsletter, Noughts and Crosses, sometimes we need to be reminded of what our Judeo-Christian heritage has brought to the world – the establishment of schools, universities, hospitals, aged care organisations and welfare agencies. The elevation of women, as well as the abolition of slavery, cannibalism, child sacrifice and widow burning.

The ‘equality of human beings’ is a Judeo-Christian idea which led to the abolition of slavery and international human rights.

All form the basis of Western civilisation which acknowledged original sin and the need for redemption.

We fail, we sin, we feel guilty. Acknowledging this is virtue.

In response, we confess, we repent, we accept forgiveness, and then we move forward with confidence. That is how we survive the vicissitudes of life.

I have proven this in my own life.

Marxists, leftists, and people from many other cultures, however, do not see it that way.

To them, admitting fault is seen as weakness. They do not accept responsibility for their situation. They blame others. To them, all is a zero-sum game.

And herein lies the problem.

By rejecting God’s system of confession, repentance and forgiveness, Westerners respond by looking elsewhere to placate their guilt – virtue-signalling being one of the main outlets.

As British-born American philosopher and scholar Kwame Anthony Appiah points out, watching King Charles acknowledge the unceded – or ‘stolen’ land – on which the Canadian parliament stands begs the question, ‘Then why do they continue to occupy it? And the obvious contradiction: acknowledging theft while benefiting from it is like apologising for eating someone’s lunch while still holding the sandwich!’

This is the West surrendering to the anti-God Left.

British journalist and political commentator Douglas Murray makes this point in his 2017 book, The Strange Death of Europe.

It is civilizational suicide.

Speaking of which, allow me to make an observation or two about the recent Federal election.

First, before too many claims are made about Labor getting a ‘strong mandate’, at the previous election (2022) Labor’s primary vote was 32.5%. In 2025, it was 34.5% – a 2% improvement.

As a percentage of registered voters, however – including informal votes and those who chose not to vote – Labor’s vote was just 29.5%

Seats won, however, paints a very different picture – from 77 seats in 2022 to 94 seats in 2025 – a 22% increase.

Winning 62% of the seats with 29% of the vote is starting to look like the UK or Europe!

Or compare Labor’s vote in 2016 (34.7%) 69 seats; 2019 (33.3%) 68 seats; 2022 (32.5%) 77 seats; and now 2025 (34.5%) 94 seats!

The disparity between votes and seats in 2025 is due to changes in preferences by the Liberal Party and minor parties.

In the past, the Liberal Party would typically put Labor last on its how-to-vote cards. This time it put the Greens last, resulting in what one might describe as the bright and silver lining on an otherwise dark and gloomy cloud – the ejection from parliament of Greens leader Adam Bandt!

In India it was said that people did not cast their vote but rather vote their caste. India’s caste system divided its society into hierarchical groups based on birth, occupation and ‘dharma’ – a cosmic order of law and moral principles that apply to all beings and things – and people voted accordingly.

That Labor’s vote does not change materially from election to election suggests that the old ‘Labor, right or wrong’ principle is alive and well.

Whether it’s education, immigration, net zero, energy or the environment – power bills going up $1,300 instead of coming down $275 – Israel and the Palestinians, international relationships (UN, WHO, WEF etc), the taxing of unrealised capital gains on our superannuation, abortion and euthanasia, the Albanese government is deeply entrenched in the Left of politics.

It will not end well.

Which is why we are readying ourselves.

Our merger plans with the DLP (and other like-minded parties) are progressing and we are looking forward to contesting the next election on the horizon – the South Australian State election in March next year.

Thank you for your support.

Noughts and Crosses

by

CrossFrançois-Marie Voltaire, the world’s most famous atheist, once proclaimed that although he didn’t believe in God, he employed devout Christians to be his accountant, his cook and his barber because, he said, ‘I don’t want to be robbed, poisoned or have my throat slit!’

Voltaire’s credo is a variation of the admission by another famous atheist, Richard Dawkins, who has taken of late to describe himself as a ‘cultural Christian’. He feels ‘at home’, he says, in the Christian ethos, going on to say that substituting Christianity with anything else ‘would be truly dreadful’.

Sometimes we need to remind ourselves of Christianity’s great contributions to the world.

Most of the world’s languages for example were put into writing by Christian missionaries.  More schools and universities were started by Christians than by any other group. Motivated by a sense of concern for others, Christians established hospitals, aged care organisations and welfare agencies.

The elevation of women was a Christian achievement, as was the abolition of slavery, cannibalism, child sacrifice and widow burning. Before Christianity came along, almost every civilisation and culture practised slavery or human sacrifice.

Countries which today enjoy the greatest civil liberties are generally those places where the Christian gospel has penetrated the most.

There is a Chinese proverb, “The tears of strangers are only water”. When there is famine or genocide in Africa, for example, Christianity says, “Those people are human like us, we need to help them”. Other cultures say, “Yes, it’s a problem but it’s not our problem”.

The ‘equality of human beings’ is a Christian idea which led to the abolition of slavery and international human rights. US Founding Father Thomas Jefferson said, “That all men are created equal is self-evident”. Most cultures throughout history however, reject this. ‘Inequality’ is what is self-evident they say – height, weight, strength, intelligence, truthfulness, talent etc. What Jefferson was referring to of course was ‘moral equality’. Each life is as valuable as any other.

Closer to home, the Reverend John Flynn founded the Flying Doctor Service and the Australian Inland Mission. His Presbyterian Ministers were known as ‘the boundary riders of the bush’ and were responsible for establishing communication through the inland pedal wireless.  Early colonial Governors Macquarie, Hunter and Brisbane were committed Christians. Governor Macquarie personally promoted the British and Foreign Bible Society and the Sunday School Movement. And Australia’s Constitution begins with the phrase, “…. humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God ….”

Which brings me to a disturbing but symptomatic example of attempts to remove Christianity from the public square – in this case, quite literally.

For more than 30 years, a small church in the Adelaide Hills village of Houghton, has erected three crosses at Easter time. The crosses are simple but strong structures which have steel ‘cleats’ attached to them to enable the crosses to drop into pipe sleeves in the ground. After Easter, the crosses are removed, the pipe sleeves capped, and a small amount of dirt and grass placed over the caps awaiting re-discovery the following year.

Easter

For reasons known only to local government bureaucrats, but obscure to common sense, the local council this year saw fit to remove the crosses shortly after they were installed.

The improbable reasons given for removing the crosses were that the Council had been ‘inundated with complaints’, that ‘no permit had been issued’, and ‘there were public safety concerns’. As one resident put it, ‘Safety concerns? What were they concerned about? That they’d go out there one morning and find someone had been nailed to one of the crosses and they would get the blame?’

EasterNot only had the crosses been removed, but a ‘Parking Infringement Notice’ had been attached to one of them together with a card inviting the reader to contact the Council for further information. This I subsequently did, only to be threatened with ‘another fine’ if the church didn’t immediately repair the slight depression in the ground where the crosses once stood!

One is always loath to attribute to malice what can be better explained by over-zealous bureaucracy, hence a post on Facebook and subsequent local backlash over the Council’s actions did result in an immediate offer by the Council to reinstate the crosses.

Regrettably, the industrious Council inspector had not only removed the crosses, but for some inexplicable reason had also dug out the in-ground sleeves which made it a major task to re-assemble the display.

As for the alleged ‘inundation’ of complaints – none having ever been recorded over the previous 34 years – the Houghton Church and its local residents enjoy a relationship going back 150 years. A local calendar features the following description of Houghton Church:

‘In August 2025, the Houghton Uniting Church will celebrate the 150th Anniversary of the laying of its foundation stone. Throughout that time – including through two World Wars and other cataclysmic events – Houghton Church and its members have been a source of comfort and care when needed. It has also been an important connection point for community events including its annual Christmas Carols on the Green and Pancake Tuesday events, as well as being an active participant in Remembrance Day and Anzac Day services. And of course, Weddings, Christenings and Funerals held at the church provide a service to the community during life’s ever-present milestones.’

These Councils need to be reminded of the old saying, ‘Be careful what you wish for’.

Banning Christianity from the public square is one thing, but trying to ban it from the local village square takes it to a place where even angels fear to tread …!

Thank you for your support.

Rock, Paper, Scissors

by

rock-paper-scissorsLord Byron, in his moving poem Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, offers the following reflection on life:

I seek no sympathies, nor needs,
The thorns which I have reaped are of the tree I planted,
They have torn me, and I bleed
I should have known what fruit would spring from such a seed.

If there’s one immutable lesson we learn from life, it is ‘we reap what we sow’.

From the micro to the macro, from the personal to the national, we know that actions have consequences.

In the natural world of physics, Isaac Newton formulated the laws of motion – his third law being that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction – meaning that if one object exerts a force on a second object, the second object exerts an equal and opposite force back on the first.

We can all relate to this.

In the political world, it is said, ‘No good turn goes unpunished’ or ‘Why is he attacking me? I never did him any favours!’

My father used to say, ‘Beware of beginnings’. Once you start something, it is difficult to end it.

You may not even be thanked for beginning it, only criticized for ending it.

Which must be how America and Donald Trump are feeling right now.

For 80 years, America has patrolled the world’s shipping lanes, keeping trade functioning.

It has, at its own expense, been the world’s policeman and the principal source of funding for all manner of aid and humanitarian relief.

So, when a new President wants to clean up the ‘waste, fraud and abuse’ in the system and start forcing wealthy countries to pay more towards their own defences, instead of the world thanking them for 80 years of benevolence, it cops nothing but abuse.

Surely it is time the rest of the world acknowledged that it should not be left to one country to solve all the world’s problems.

After all, a strong America – militarily and financially – is undoubtedly a good thing for the world.

Even more so considering the rise of China.

In another case of reaping what has been sown, it has long been an accepted understanding in liberal democracies that there be a balance between a State’s three heads of power – the Legislature (congress/parliament), the Executive (President/Prime Minister/Cabinet Ministers) and the Judiciary (judges/courts).

It is the ‘rock – paper – scissors’ of how democratic societies govern themselves.

As we learn from the childhood game, ‘the rock blunts the scissors, the scissors cuts the paper, and the paper wraps the rock’.

If, however, one of the branches becomes too powerful and no other branch can control it, the system collapses.

Witness the dangerous overreach by some of the world’s judiciaries in taking on the role of opposition to popularly elected governments.

While we understand why those accustomed to having power do not like relinquishing that power – access to taxpayers’ money to fund their political infrastructure being the primary reason – engaging in relentless legal warfare such as that waged against Donald Trump invariably backfires.

And what French President Emmanuel Macron’s left-wing Renaissance party could not achieve at the ballot box, has been taken up on its behalf by the courts to convict the leading contender in the next election, Marine Le Pen, banning her from contesting the election!

Similar legal shenanigans have been occurring in Brazil, Romania and Israel, with unelected judges going out of their way to thwart the will of the people.

Canadian author Mark Steyn makes an ominous prediction:

‘We will soon no longer be able to vote ourselves out of this’.

In other words, no matter how people vote, the ruling class will not accept it.

The upshot will undoubtedly be the deterioration of national cohesion and the undermining of confidence in a country’s institutions.

We reap what we sow.

In one final observation, health has always been one of those ‘actions have consequences’ domains.

The term ‘fat cats’, for example, was once used to describe rich people. Poor people were undernourished and thin.

Today, it is often the case that the poor are obese, and the rich are thin!

Why is that?

Why has obesity more than doubled over recent years when governments spend more on health than ever before – and promise to spend even more at every election?

The same goes for education.

In 2013 the federal government spent $12bn on schools.

It is now $30bn, yet all the objective tests show school results going backwards.

The Australian’s Greg Sheridan says, ‘Whatever the problem was, it wasn’t money’.

But perhaps it was.

Too much of it, that is.

We reap what we sow.

Thank you for your support.

VUCA World

by

Donald-TrumpAs most will recall, the Coalition went to the 2013 election promising to ‘abolish the carbon tax, abolish the mining tax and stop the boats’.

Upon election, seven Centre-Right (CR) Senate crossbenchers voted in support of these three key election pledges giving the Coalition Government the numbers it needed (33 + 7) to get its legislation passed.

The seven Senators comprised three Palmer United Party (PUP) Senators, Ricky Muir of the Motoring Enthusiasts’ Party which had entered into a formal alliance with PUP, the DLP’s John Maddigan, the Liberal Democrats’ David Leyonhjelm and me, representing Family First.

With four Senators in his team, plus the fact Clive Palmer had been elected to the House of Representatives seat of Fairfax, watching Clive Palmer in action during that time reminded me of a comment by Winston Churchill about US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles whom he described as “… the only bull I know who carries around his own china shop!”

Clive was, and still is, a force of nature.

Following this successful endeavour, David Leyonhjelm and I met with Prime Minister Tony Abbott and put to him what we called a 40–40–40 game plan: ‘40 votes (a Senate majority) to fix 40 years of unfinished business and set the nation up for the next 40 years.’

We tried valiantly to convince him that the best way to get Coalition policies through the parliament was to have more Senators elected like us. That is, if the Coalition couldn’t win a majority in its own right – which seemed unlikely (and still seems unlikely) – it should at least attempt to achieve a majority with the support of like-minded minor party Senators.

Needless to say, our suggestion was not taken up.

In fact, the exact opposite happened. The Coalition, under Malcolm Turnbull, teamed up with the Greens (who had voted against ‘abolishing the carbon tax, abolishing the mining tax and stopping the boats’) and changed the Senate voting laws to get rid of those very Senators who had supported them!

As a result, and as predicted by John Howard at the time, the Greens increased their number of Senate seats from 10 to 12, Labor increased its number of seats from 25 to 26, centre-left parties increased from 1 to 3, the Coalition lost a seat, and the CR parties dropped from 7 seats to 3. From 33 + 7 (a CR majority) to 32 + 3 (a CR minority). A loss of 5 Senate seats!

If anyone can explain why the Coalition did that, I’d love to hear from them.

Well, Clive is back, this time as Chairman of the Trumpet of Patriots Party (formerly the Australian Federation Party).

Readers of this blog would recall numerous exhortations by me for Australia’s CR parties to work more co-operatively and to move from thinking ‘State-based’, to thinking and acting ‘nationally’.

If a CR party gets a Senator elected, that Senator should be viewed by their party not as their State Senator, but as their National Senator. The Senate, after all, hasn’t been a state-based institution for more than a hundred years. There is virtually no recognition of States in the way the Senate operates. Senators don’t even sit with their State colleagues; they sit with their party colleagues.

Which brings us to the impending Federal election.

We are currently living in what has been described as a VUCA world – volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous.

Many believe, me included, that what Donald Trump has done, and is doing, in America is badly needed here in Australia (ignore his tariffs on steel – they are so insignificant that they will have no effect on us. Donald Trump is a free-trader – he personally oversaw numerous free-trade deals when he was last in office. In any event, if we are so concerned about the price of steel, we should be focussing on the energy, IR and business regulation costs associated with making Australian steel).

What Trump is giving America, and the world, is a long-overdue dose of reality.

The borrowed time, the borrowed money, is coming to an end.

Europeans and Australians have been freeloading on America for more than 50 years and Americans want it to stop.

We should want it to stop.

The world has been acting like a school playground with its bullies and weaklings and America playing the part of the teacher trying to protect the weaklings from the bullies.

But the weaklings in this case do not need to be weak. Countries such as Germany and Australia are wealthy and resourceful and could, like Israel, stand on their own two feet if only they had a mind to.

Trump famously said, ‘Drill, baby, drill.’

We should be saying, ‘Mine, baby, mine!’ and ‘Farm, baby, farm!’

As has been wryly observed, there really are only two industries in the world – mining and farming. The rest are jobs.

And Australia happens to be very good at mining and farming.

Also on Trump’s list are:

  • Ending the climate change/renewable energy scam
  • Curbing immigration
  • Championing free speech
  • Supporting Israel
  • Instituting a Department of Government Efficiency (D.O.G.E.)
  • Advocating for a peace deal in Ukraine
  • Ending support for the transgender movement.

On that last point, we had the unbelievable spectacle during a recent NSW Government Estimates Hearing of the NSW Minister for Women and PREVENTION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT, Jodie Harrison, saying if ‘someone identifies as a woman, they should feel free to use the women’s changerooms’.

This is the sort of wokeness that needs to be purged from society.

Our Prime Minister, however, seems to be going out of his way to annoy America’s newly elected President.

Albanese has made no secret of the fact that he doesn’t like Donald Trump – or America for that matter – but for Australia’s sake does he have to take the opposite side to Trump on everything?

It brings to mind those two great books – ‘How To Win Friends and Influence People’ and ‘How to Lose Friends and Irritate People’.

Anthony Albanese, Penny Wong, Kevin Rudd and many others have clearly been reading the wrong book!

Albanese and Labor are taking Australia down a very dangerous path.

From the Israel–Palestinian conflict to Russia and Ukraine – ‘We stand with Ukraine and will consider sending troops there’ – to censorship laws, to cosying up to the UK’s Keir Starmer who also detests Trump, Albanese has gone out of his way to make it clear he is not on the same page as our most important ally.

Former Labor Foreign Minister Bob Carr says Australia should re-consider its relationship with the US and re-open discussions with the French on the submarine project!

The French! Who are, shall we say, ‘not famous for their military reliability’.

And all this while Chinese warships sail around our coastline!

In preparation for the 2026 SA State election, we have completed the Australian Family Party’s re-registration process with the SA Electoral Commission.

However, to:

  1. Promote the all-important cause of centre-right minor parties nationally (à la 2013) and
  2. Help enact Trump-like policies here in Australia,

I have joined the Trumpet of Patriots (ToP) SA Senate team for the forthcoming Federal election and Nicole Hussey, also from the Australian Family Party, will be the ToP candidate for the South Australian seat of Boothby.

Thank you for your support.