Freedom

The Shrinking Forest – Part 3

19/01/2023 by Australian Family Party

‘How Christianity Informs Classical Liberalism’

In my last two articles for Political Itch, The Shrinking Forest – Part 1 and The Shrinking Forest – Part 2 , I showed how George Orwell’s novel 1984 seems to be coming true, how the size of government grows ever larger and how rent-seekers are not only doing what they’ve always done but are getting much better at it. How this happens without sparking a popular uprising, I invoke the fable of ‘the shrinking forest’. I also explained why our fellow citizens are so disengaged from politics and what they can do to start the fightback.

In this part (Part 3) I’d like to discuss how we’ve reached this position – specifically how our opponents have attacked classical liberalism and libertarianism by first undermining Christianity. You may be sceptical of this. You make not even see a link. But history reveals all and lessons from the past illuminate what our opponents are doing today.

Western democracy was founded in Christianity and in the family. It’s why Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the co-authors of The Communist Manifesto, were determined to undermine both. Marx and Engels knew faith and family were the enemy. They did not like what families and people of faith talked about around the dinner table.

In his brilliant book, The Subversive Family, British writer Ferdinand Mount argued that marriage and the family, far from being oppressed by the ruling class, were in fact the chief bulwarks against authoritarianism. Family, faith and freedom are without doubt the best bulwarks against division and authoritarianism.

As for faith, removing Christians from the public square seems to be the unstated aim. ‘Net zero Christians by 2050’, quipped by Rebecca Weisser.

‘Every citizen is equal before the law.”

I would argue that the Christian is the model libertarian. Knowing that one day they will stand before their Creator and give an account of themselves, Christians aim to be the personification of personal responsibility. Endowed with a free will to choose right or wrong, Christians cannot blame anyone else for their actions. It follows therefore, that if God is going to hold people responsible for their actions, then God would give them the right to decide how they conduct their lives.

For example, taking away from someone the right to decide for themselves how much they are willing to work for, is to deny them a God-given right to work. People do things for their reasons, not yours, and people constantly make trade-offs depending on a range of factors known best only to themselves and their families.

It is also why the Bible tells us not once, but twice, “Do not favour the poor in court”. This is real justice, not ‘social justice’.

Favouring one group of citizens over another based on socio-economic or racial grounds is not only immoral, it also foolish. It always ends badly – especially for the favoured group.

Note, this is not to be confused with obligations we have towards each other in a personal capacity. ‘Who is my neighbour?’ Jesus was asked, in the famous ‘good Samaritan’ parable.

In this, the Christian has no difficulty with public policy – ie, ‘what is sinful vs what should be unlawful’. Sin is personal, the law is for everyone.

And then there’s family. There has been a relentless push to replace father and mother, male and female, with something else. A village perhaps? There was that leftist trope – ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’ As one wag responded, ‘Yes, and it takes a village idiot to believe that.’

More troubling is the breadth of the battleground.

Just look at the global coordination achieved by the Left with respect to Black Lives Matter, Roe v Wade, transgenderism, climate and Covid. Notice the activists all seem to read from the same script. It’s formulaic for sure and almost robotically applied globally regardless of where the original issue occurred.

The Covid response was near uniform globally and we are only now seeing the effects with little to no accountability. There were protests in Adelaide with pictures of George Floyd – a police excessive-use-of-force issue in faraway Minneapolis USA. The US Supreme Court then ruled that abortion should be a state matter and, out of nowhere, the rapid response pro-abortion rallies were rolled-out city by city in Australia, each jurisdiction of which had abortion laws already in place. Go figure.

Whatever you think of these issues, my point is that the global coordination is chilling.

There is no doubt Australia has economic and social problems that it is going to have to solve – inflation, rising interest rates, high mortgages (forcing both parents out to work), high cost of living (educating and raising children, power prices, water prices) – and social ills caused by the rupturing of family relationships due to mental health and addictions of various kinds.

Our nation also has economic and social goals it wants to achieve – increased productivity, affordable housing, lower crime rates. However, looking to politicians, bureaucrats and regulators to solve these problems and achieve these goals seems to be a lost cause.

As for free markets, property rights, personal responsibility, self-reliance, free speech, lower taxes, the rule of law, and smaller government, these have all but been abandoned.

Major party MPs seem more interested in making friends across the aisle than looking for ways ‘to improve the life of the ordinary citizen’ as described by Charles Taylor in his book, The Affirmation of the Ordinary Life.

Once elected, MPs are easily captured. They like being Members of Parliament and they like being liked – including by members of other parties. They also love socialising; they don’t want to be ostracised or booed on the ABC for making a stand or championing a cause. On issue after issue, they seem weak. They have lost both their philosophical bearings and religious convictions. Take away religious conviction and classical liberalism becomes less grounded. One flows from the other.

I would argue it is not possible to ‘break through’ all this. We have to ‘break with’. We have to force the major parties’ hands through the brutal reality of balance-of-power politics.

Next week I would like to flag a ground-breaking idea for change. Something practical. An innovation which I trust will bring hope and optimism.

Thank you for your support.

And please keep reading Political Itch ….!

The Shrinking Forest – Part 2

19/01/2023 by Australian Family Party

‘All Great Change Begins at the Dinner Table’

Last week, I commented on how spooky George Orwell’s predictions in his dystopian novel 1984 have become – a growing state, growing authoritarianism, the rise of rent-seekers and how our fellow citizens are being manipulated.

So, let’s talk more about our fellow citizens, what’s happening with them, and how we can help them to fight back.

Most people do not follow politics so have no idea what is happening around them and to them. Often their only source of information is via social media – and who controls that? Those who want more government, more spending, more taxes, more regulation and more control, of course. Facebook, for example is censoring information which urges people to vote “no” in the upcoming referendum on the Voice. As former Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said, “Big Tech is joining with government in trying to force the Voice through without a debate.”

Former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson said recently, “We live in an age of astonishing disengagement by far too many good citizens in the life of our nation. I suspect that without compulsory voting we’d have up to half the electorate not bothering to vote at all.”

Disengaging citizens from politics is not accidental. Keeping people in the dark, doing things that turn them off politics – parliament’s Question Time for example, where not only do politicians behave appallingly, but also brazenly claim to be acting ‘in the best interests of the Australian people’, when they are clearly acting in their own interest and the interests of the rent-seeking cartels. It is no wonder people are disillusioned and disengaged.

As we know, most people do not like confrontation and choose instead to ‘opt out’. They let the world be ruled by ‘those who show up’ as the old saying goes. The problem is that those who show up are not the ‘good citizens’ John Anderson has in mind.

What will it take to engage people – a catastrophe perhaps?

Australians are about to be mugged by reality. Higher mortgage rates, power blackouts, food and petrol shortages, price rises, a housing affordability and rental crisis are going to severely test the Albanese government.

Across the globe there is havoc. Ukraine, Taiwan, an energy crisis, rising interest rates caused by rising inflation, Covid, climate, the Voice, workplace relations changes aka more union power, rising electricity and gas prices. Shakespeare’s ‘dogs of war’ are growling, and Australia will not escape at least some of this havoc.

Here in Australia, Gillian Triggs, the former president of Australia’s Human Rights Commission received a standing ovation at a (former Greens leader) Bob Brown event, for a speech which included the line, “Sadly, you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home.”

I prefer the version of former US President Ronald Reagan, in his farewell address following his successful eight-year presidency when he said, “All great change begins at the dinner table”.

In 2015, when (former Senator) David Leyonhjelm and I were in parliament, we tried to amend Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. The amendment we proposed in our Racial Discrimination Amendment Bill was relatively modest. It simply removed the highly subjective terms “offend” and “insult” from the Act. Words such as “humiliate” and “intimidate” remained. If the Bill had passed, the original intention of the Racial Discrimination Act would have been restored – freedom of speech and protection against racial discrimination. These two objectives would have been able to co-exist in equilibrium.

The Coalition blocked our Bill.

Next week, how our opponents attack classical liberalism by first undermining Christianity.

The Shrinking Forest – Part 1

19/01/2023 by Australian Family Party

‘Itch’ (noun) “… an irritating sensation on the skin that makes one want to scratch the affected part”.

What may have started as ‘an irritating sensation on the skin’, regrettably has developed into a full-blown cancer affecting the nation’s vital organs.

I am talking about authoritarianism.

Shortly after World War II, George Orwell published his novel ‘1984’. The story was set in a country ruled by ‘Big Brother’, a supreme dictator in an all-powerful, one-party state. The central character, Winston Smith, whose job it was to re-write the nation’s history books to fit the current narrative of the state, was continually tormented by his task. The department in which he worked was called ‘The Ministry of Truth’.

Orwell’s novel exposed the true nature of authoritarian governments which hold on to power by generating fear, distorting facts and censoring alternative views. For a book published in 1949, his description of surveillance technology to track and trace citizens is downright spooky.

“Know everything in order to control everyone,” said Adam Weishaupt.
Technology and mass surveillance allow governments to do just that – know everything.

‘The long march through the institutions’ is nearing completion.

More government, more spending, more taxes, more regulation, more state power, more state control. Income tax, payroll tax, land tax, petrol tax, the goods & services tax, stamp duty, excise duty on alcohol and tobacco, power company dividends, water company dividends, the River Murray Levy, the Emergency Services Levy, the Regional Landscape Levy, the Solid Waste Levy, the Medicare Levy, Council Rates and many, many more. Local, state and federal governments taxing us at every turn.

And of course, that most pernicious of all taxes – inflation tax. Pernicious because it so disproportionally affects those who spend a higher percentage of their income on food, petrol, electricity and gas, which are more susceptible to price rises.

Naturally, the government blames everyone else for the price rises – greedy businesses, supply chains, Vladimir Putin … anyone but themselves.

As US economist Peter Schiff puts it, “Inflation is caused by governments spending money they don’t have, accompanied by compliant central banks who not only forsake their mandates to keep inflation under control by putting up interest rates and punishing governments who overspend, they instead indulge governments by printing the money for them!”

Following the 1980s excesses, the Reserve Bank of Australia increased interest rates to 17.5% and the Hawke-Keating government copped a mountain of pain. Yet, despite massive deficit spending over the past three years – the highest in the nation’s history – the RBA last month lifted interest rates to just 3.1%.

So, what happens when spending is not accompanied by revenue measures to pay for it? Where does the money come from? Inflation. Instead of higher taxes, consumers pay higher prices.

The bad news is it is going to get worse. And when it does, the Albanese government will again try to blame greedy businesses and introduce more price controls on them – like the recent coal price cap. Not good times ahead.

Then there’s the government’s bagmen accomplices, the rent-seekers – companies that base their business models on providing goods and services to consumers that are either paid for by the government or the government prevents or limits competition. It is another layer of taxation which disproportionally affects low-income families – those who can’t afford to install solar panels on their roofs, for example.

These rent-seekers are now everywhere – energy, superannuation, pharmaceuticals, higher education, land development, indigenous groups, public transport, manufacturing – you name it. They are a scourge. They tarnish the political process, distort the market and in the case of so-called ‘renewable energy’, distort the entire economy.

Renewable energy rent-seekers have leapt onto the climate change bandwagon with unbridled zeal and are raking in billions of dollars gaming the system, raising energy prices, impoverishing consumers, destroying jobs, and fleecing taxpayers.

Along with unions and industry superfunds, these new Australian oligarchs have limitless amounts of money to both shore up their own positions and resist anyone who might try to challenge them.

Previously, entrepreneurs went to the marketplace to make their fortunes. Today the public purse is the mother lode.

When the NDIS was announced in 2012, it was forecast to cost $14bn a year. In April 2022, actuary firm Taylor Fry estimated that by 2030 the cost will blow out to $64bn a year– a $50bn a year increase.

How was this allowed to happen in such a short period of time? Simple – professionalised politics and sophisticated rent-seeking.

The story is told of a forest that was continually shrinking – but the trees kept voting for the axe. The axe, you see, was very clever; it was able to convince the trees that because its handle was made of wood, it was one of them.

Abraham Lincoln

01/12/2022 by Australian Family Party

One of Abraham Lincoln’s favorite riddles goes like this:

Question: ‘How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg?’

Answer: ‘Four’.

Explanation: Calling a tail a leg, does not make it a leg.

Nice one, Abe.

Applying Lincoln’s riddle to the recent Victorian election, the one glaring lesson for the Liberal Party is that you can’t call yourself a ‘a party of freedom, personal responsibility, self-reliance, free speech, lower taxes, the rule of law, property rights, free markets and smaller government,’ and then campaign promising the complete opposite of those things and expect to be taken seriously.

Being authentic is still a valuable commodity in politics.

As for the minor parties who, by and large, do genuinely believe in ‘family, faith and freedom’, some hard-headed decision-making might be in order.

Like the art of war, politics is about three things – strategy, tactics and operations. Strategy is the big picture (policy) destination, tactics is about local smarts (candidates, polling, preference arrangements) and operations is the day-to-day mechanics of running a political party and an election campaign. For minor parties, all three are essential – particularly preference arrangements where group voting tickets still exist, as in Victoria.

Using interstate preference agreements, I was elected to the Senate twice – in 2013 and 2016 – despite having a lower primary vote than some other minor parties. Even at the recent 2022 Federal election, I was the Liberal Party’s first preference after the Liberal and National Party candidates. I wasn’t elected, but having the resources of a major party handing out how-to-vote cards with your name featured in such a prominent preference position is invaluable.

If the right-of-centre minor parties are to counter the left-of-centre minor parties and pseudo-independents, they need to work more closely together. They could, for example, agree to each party being assigned a state or region, with all the other parties agreeing to sacrifice their local chances to ensure, depending on their level of the primary vote, that one or two prizes for each party are achieved.

As for reforming the major parties from within, I do not share the view espoused by the few conservatives left in the Liberal Party that the answer is for more conservatives to join the Party. Reforming from within is flawed for the simple reason that it contradicts basic human nature – the immutable law of self-interest.

How many MPs do you think would be prepared to withstand the threats to their seat from activist lefties? The answer is ‘very few’.

Once elected, MPs get captured. They like being Members of Parliament and they like being liked. They also like the socialising; they don’t want to be ostracised or booed on the ABC for making a stand or championing a cause – especially a moral cause like abortion or euthanasia or transgenderism or challenging the climate change/renewable energy orthodoxy.

In other words, I would argue it is not possible to ‘break-through’, you have to ‘break-with’, and force the major parties’ hands through the brutal reality of balance-of-power politics.

In his very timely book, Democracy in a Divided Australia, Matthew Lesh writes:

‘Australia has a new political, cultural, and economic elite. The class divides of yesteryear have been replaced by new divisions between Inners and Outers. This divide is ripping apart our political parties, national debate, and social fabric.

Inners are highly educated inner-city progressive cosmopolitans who value change, diversity, and self-actualisation. Inners, despite being a minority, dominate politics on both sides, the bureaucracy, universities, civil society, corporates, and the media. They have created a society ruled by educated elites – that is, ruled by themselves.

Outers are the instinctive traditionalists who value stability, safety, and unity. Outers are politically, culturally, and economically marginalised in today’s graduate-dominated knowledge society era. Their voice is muzzled in public debate, driving disillusionment with the major parties, and record levels of frustration, disengagement, and pessimism.’

Jordan Peterson said recently that we have allowed the left to ‘forget its original goal of supporting the poor’, who are paying the most in what he described as the ‘completely fabricated energy crisis in Europe’ caused by the region’s heavy dependence on unreliable renewables.

‘Hiking the price of basic commodities like energy will precipitously knock a large number of people who are hanging on to the edge of the world with their fingernails into the pit. And that’s exactly what’s happened in Europe.

This is something for conservatives to beat the drum about. You want to serve the poor? It’s very straightforward – make energy as cheap as you possibly can. Why? Because energy is work and work is productivity and productivity raises people out of poverty, and we’ve been very good at raising people out of poverty.’

Personally, I would argue the left’s goal was never about ‘supporting the poor’, but rather using the poor to gain power. The poor have long since been abandoned by the left who have now found other ways to gain power – like racial division, Covid-19, and climate change (and its bagman renewable energy).

Will it take a catastrophe to bring voters to their senses?

Perhaps.

In the meantime, here at the Australian Family Party we continue to refine our own ‘strategy, tactics and operations’.

In closing, it has been a very eventful year with the party contesting both State and Federal elections. Thank you for your support throughout the year, particularly our candidates, volunteers and donors. I look forward to continuing the battle in 2023.

Happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year to everyone.

And thank you again.

Postcard from Nepal

01/11/2022 by Australian Family Party

A 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 in only six months I’ve become the No 2 disciple in the whole Ashram, and I reckon I’ll be No 1 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 when it 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.” – Diderot

Like the young man in the Ashram, what the people who supported these tyrants naïvely overlooked was the inability of human beings to prevent the abuse of power and position once it has been attained.

The threat to our nation, and the Western world, is not a virus or climate change, it is the slow takeover of every aspect of our lives by those who seek more and more power. We are witnessing the ascension of a new authoritarianism. ‘The long march through the institutions’ is nearing completion.

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

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

For example, kill-switches are now fitted to many makes of motor vehicles – rental cars in particular. These switches can be accessed remotely or programmed to activate if the vehicle approaches a certain geographical area. Legislation was passed recently in the US mandating that by 2026 a kill-switch must be included within the operating software of all new motor cars (see Biden kill switch by 2026).

We’ve already seen freedom of speech and communication curtailed, freedom of movement will be next.

In England, zone restrictions have been introduced in cities such as Oxford 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 can now be used to control a home’s power usage – or disconnect the power completely. No need to physically visit homes that might have locked gates or uncooperative homeowners.

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

A quotation often attributed to GK Chesterton (but actually coined by Belgian writer Emile Cammaerts who was studying Chesterton at the time) puts it in a nutshell, “When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing, they believe in anything.”

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

The state, presided over by its gurus and high priests who are every bit as dogmatic and dictatorial as you’ll find in any sect or cult, has become the new religion.

We must stand firm. We must not yield.

This is not easy. Please support us in our efforts to monitor and report what is happening. Thank you.

Note: I will be joining the Panel at the forthcoming ‘Church & State’ Conference in Adelaide on 5 November. For further information click here.

Stop Monkeying Around

01/10/2022 by Australian Family Party

A group of social scientists conducted the following experiment:

Starting with a cage containing five monkeys, the scientists hung a banana on a string inside the cage and placed a set of stairs under it.

Within seconds, one of the monkeys went to the stairs and started to climb towards the banana. As soon as the monkey touched the stairs, the scientists sprayed all the other monkeys with cold water.

After a short while, another monkey made a similar attempt with the same result – all the other monkeys were sprayed with cold water. Before long, if any monkey tried to climb the stairs, the other monkeys prevented it from doing so.

They then put away the cold water and removed one of the monkeys from the cage and replaced it with a new one. The new monkey saw the banana and immediately started to climb the stairs. To its surprise and horror, all the other monkeys attacked it.

After another attempt and attack, the new monkey soon realised that if it tried to climb the stairs, it would be assaulted.

They then removed another of the original monkeys and replaced it with a new one. The newcomer also went to climb the stairs and was similarly attacked with the previous newcomer taking part in the punishment with enthusiasm! Likewise, they replaced a third original monkey, then a fourth, then the fifth. Each time the newest monkey took to the stairs, it was attacked. Most of the monkeys that were beating it had no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs nor why they were participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys had ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approached the stairs to try to get the banana.

This is how aspects of culture are created.

“Abraham Lincoln said, ‘The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of the government in the next’. Arguably, there is nothing more significant to the future of a nation as the education of its children. How we teach children about our history, our national identity, and the principles of western liberal democracy by which we live is therefore the concern of all Australians.”

The above quotation is from a booklet titled, Activism via Education: 7 ways the new Australian Curriculum will impact your kids, published by the Institute of Public Affairs. In the booklet, the authors highlight how hostile to Christianity Australia’s national curriculum is. It is also highly critical of Western civilisation.

An example of the indoctrination of children through the education system is the Government’s 2020 Early Years Learning and School Aged Care Frameworks which states, “Pre-schoolers will learn about non-binary gender identity and become champions of reconciliation and sustainability under a proposed new curriculum for early learning.”

The battle for a nation’s culture goes back a long way. The Greek-Roman wars saw Rome conquer Greece militarily, but the Greeks conquer the Romans philosophically. Rome controlled the territory, but the Greeks controlled the culture. And as modern-day management gurus tell us, ‘Culture eats strategy for breakfast!’. In Australia today, the right might control the territory but the left controls the culture.

In John Glubb’s Fate of Empires Glubb references the empires of Assyria, Persia, Greece, Rome, Arabia, Mameluke, Ottoman, Spain, Russia and Britain – and significantly, how they all lasted around the same length of time – 250 years.

In his book, Glubb describes the 7-point cycle of empires: Pioneers > Commerce > Affluence > Intellectualism > Disintegration > Decadence > Despair.

Born in 1897, Glubb did not include the United States in his book, but there is no doubt that America – Pax Americana – which replaced the British empire, has dominated the world and is now clearly in play – particularly as it exhibits the last three points in the cycle – Disintegration > Decadence > Despair.

Interestingly, the US was founded on 4 July 1776, signifying its 250 years will be up in four years’ time (2026) which seems about right considering what is happening there right now.

Our culture of Western democracy was founded in Christianity and in the family. It’s why Marx and Engels, the co-authors of the Communist Manifesto, were determined to undermine both. Marx and Engels knew faith and family were the enemy. They did not like what families and people of faith talked about around the dinner table.

It’s time to stop monkeying around.

Thank you for your support.

Checkmate

14/09/2022 by Australian Family Party

During the Republican Referendum debate in 1999, people would often ask, “The Queen seems like a very nice person, but what exactly does she do that benefits us?” I’d respond by saying, “It’s not what the Queen does, it’s what she stops other people from doing!”

More about that shortly.

When the Republican Movement started in the early 1990s, I immediately joined Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) and offered my services to them. It was at the Adelaide Town Hall launch in November 1993 that I met ACM organiser Tony Abbott, Adelaide identity Kym Bonython, editor of The Adelaide Review Christopher Pearson and Federal Court (later High Court) judge Michael Kirby. After the launch, the five of us went to the Oxford Hotel in North Adelaide for dinner to discuss tactics. So began a long association with the cause.

Asking ‘What exactly does the Monarch do?’ is a bit like asking, ‘What exactly does that guard out front of the bank do all day’?

Knowing what we know about human nature, we are not naïve enough to think there aren’t closet dictators and tyrants lurking even in Australia. There are those among us who believe they are above the people, they disdain the people and resent having to answer to them. They are not as rare as you might think.

In 1975, former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam tried to govern without the consent of parliament and was subsequently sacked by the Queen’s representative, the Governor-General.

We can be sure no-one will ever try that again – govern without the consent of parliament, that is! You only have to do it once.

With the passing of Queen Elizabeth II, everyone it seems has their own special reflections on our late Queen.

For me, I was born the year she ascended the throne – 1952. My father was born in the same year as her – 1926, and my mother adored her. She spoke warmly of her throughout her life, from her war-time exploits – my mother was in England’s Land Army – to the Queen’s annual Christmas Message. My mother never missed a message.

But now, at the age of 96, the Queen has gone. Not quite as old as her husband Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (or ‘Fella-Belong-Mrs-Queen’ as they call him in PNG’s Pidgin English) who was 99 when he died last year, but a wonderful age all the same.

Speaking of dying at 99, the Queen greatly admired the American evangelist Billy Graham who also died aged 99. As some wag said at the time, ‘God obviously wasn’t a cricket fan, giving his best player out on 99 …!’

Over a period of more than 30 years – from the 1950s to the late 1980s, the Queen met with Billy Graham at least a dozen times.

“For me, the teachings of Christ and my own personal accountability before God provide a framework in which I try to lead my life”, she said.

David Bruce, Executive Vice-President of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association said,

“Reverend Graham would say Queen Elizabeth was a deeply spiritual person. We know from listening often to her Christmas messages to the British Commonwealth, that she would invoke the gospel.

“Reverend Graham took every opportunity to end their meetings in prayer”, he said.

Here in Australia, the Republican Movement is once again firing up, sensing perhaps an opportunity to change our system of government from a Constitutional Monarchy to a Republic. From a monarch represented in Australia by a Governor-General as Head of State, to our very own President.

And there’s the rub.

How will this President be elected or appointed – by the people as in the United States? Or by a select few?

There is no doubt that if a President were to be elected, it would be a political contest. Just what we need, replacing a non-political monarch with a Donald Trump or Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton. Wonderful.

Current political leaders and academics can see the obvious flaws in a direct-election model of voting for a President. The politicisation of the office of Head of State, as in the US, would be unbearable. The last thing we need is another layer of politics.

And yet, consistent polling since 1999 shows that if we are to become a Republic and have a President as Head of State, then the people want to be the ones to elect him or her. So, for the foreseeable future, King replaces Queen. Checkmate.

One thing’s for sure, Australians will not be persuaded to change to a Republic by academics like Professor Greg Craven and his silly 1999 full-page ads:

Who will you put first –

YOUR FAMILY or the ROYAL FAMILY?

Professor Craven would do well to remember Margaret Thatcher’s maxim, ‘First you win the argument, then you win the election’ (or referendum as the case may be) and leave the writing of political ads to Clive Palmer.

So, the current system will remain with us for the time being, and Australians, as is the Australian way, will give the new King a fair go.

Not that Charles is a stranger to us. He has visited Australia no less than 16 times, even spending part of his schooling here.

God save the King.

Thank you for your support.

Between Elections

01/09/2022 by Australian Family Party

As the late Texas politician Robert Strauss used to say, “You can fool some of the people all of the time – and they’re the ones you need to concentrate on”.

In politics, the golden rule is whatever result you see, that is what was intended.

Former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson says, “We live in an age of astonishing disengagement by far too many good citizens in the life of our nation. I suspect that without compulsory voting we’d have up to half the electorate not bothering to vote at all.”

If we apply the golden rule to John Anderson’s observation, then citizens being disengaged from politics is exactly what is intended. Keep people in the dark. Do things that turn them off politics. Take parliament’s Question Time for example. Not only do our politicians behave appallingly, they take our money and our freedom and say they will act in our best interests. Instead, they act in their own interest and the interests of the rent-seeking cartels. No wonder people are disillusioned and disengaged.

This world is not a playground, it is a battleground. The troubling aspect, however, is the consistency of the forces on that battleground. Whether it’s Black Lives Matter, Roe v Wade (the US Supreme Court ruling on abortion), transgenderism, climate or Covid, the activists seem to all follow the same script – regardless of where they are in the world or how the issue affects them.

Most people are not into confrontation and opt out, leaving the world to be ‘ruled by those who show up’ as the old saying goes. The problem is that those who show up do not think like the ‘good citizens’ John Anderson has in mind.

The activists want everyone to be like them and embrace their views on everything from morality to marriage to matters of life and death – and everything in between. If you object, as US Bible teacher Chuck Swindoll puts it, “If you don’t shut up, we’ll shut you up”.

The world is polarised like never before. As we’ve said on our website previously, the (political) centre is disappearing. Public policy is becoming like a gym barbell with weights on each end and a long bar between them. People are either at one end of the political spectrum or the other.

Science was once similar to mathematics in that there was general agreement on the facts. Not anymore. ‘Follow the science’ is looking less like mathematics and more like economics, with one side of politics pushing its version of the science and the other side pushing theirs.

So, what is the answer?

As we have argued from the outset, ‘family, faith and freedom’ are the best bulwarks against division and authoritarianism. We must stand firm.

We need to be fierce advocates for the family as society’s key defender. Our Top 10 objectives are to STOP:

The ‘tax and control’ agenda – including opposing digital identity legislation.
Fearmongering – climate change is not a threat to life on earth and nor is Covid.
The money-making racket that is renewable energy.
The indoctrination of children through the education system.
The undermining of faith-based schools and organisations.
The mental health epidemic.
Addictions to alcohol, gambling, drugs and pornography.
The decline in home ownership and the associated rental nightmare.
Social media harming the young.
Bureaucrats running the country.

As the Greens have demonstrated over and over again, the way to get what you want is through political power. You get elected, you do deals to increase your Senate representation, and then when you have the balance of power – like they have now, you flex your muscles and get your way.

If you agree, please continue to support us – particularly between elections.

A basic $20 annual donation would cover our expenses. Please support us if you can here.

Thank you again.

The Veil of Ignorance

03/08/2022 by Australian Family Party

In his fascinating book, A Theory of Justice, the American moral, legal and political philosopher John Rawls promotes an idea called the Veil of Ignorance.

When drawing up laws, says Rawls, lawmakers should imagine themselves standing behind a curtain or veil, ignorant of what position they themselves will occupy once the law has been passed. Rawls cites a number of examples of this idea, the second being housing which I will cover shortly.

The first example he gives is in relation to slavery. What sort of law would lawmakers write if they were unsure whether they themselves would be slave or slave owner once the curtain was lifted?

His second example of housing is as relevant today as it was in 1970 when he wrote his ground-breaking book.

This approach, he states, would create a more just society.

Let’s consider this in relation to housing.

Knowing what they know now, how would today’s baby-boomers write housing and planning laws if they did not know, once the veil was lifted, whether they would be young or old?

In the event they found themselves in the ‘young’ category, it is beyond doubt they would want low-cost, low-entry level rules to get into their first home – as happened for them 40 years earlier!

As we know, low-cost, low-entry housing is not what first homebuyers are faced with in 2022. Entry-level housing is not three times the median wage like it was for previous generations. It is seven … eight … nine … even ten times the median income.

Regrettably, today’s laws are written more in the mode of ‘I’m alright Jack, pull the ladder up’ rather than, ‘What if I’m a young person trying to get a foot on the employment ladder or trying to buy a first home, or having to pay off a student loan?’

As previously described on this site, Australia does not have, and has never had, a ‘housing’ affordability problem. It has a ‘land’ affordability problem. The actual cost of building a house in Australia has kept pace with inflation and is low by international standards. The price of land on which to the build the house, however, has skyrocketed.

Land is the problem.

By restricting the amount of land available, lawmakers have sent the price of entry-level housing through the roof. Lawmakers have used urban planning laws to restrict the amount of fringe land available and have then drip fed it to a land-starved housing industry.

The ‘scarcity’ that drives up land prices is wholly contrived – it has been a matter of political choice, not geographic reality. It is the product of restrictions imposed through planning regulation and zoning.

Some of the claims used by lawmakers to stop urban growth are that urban growth is not good for the environment, or that it prevents the loss of agricultural land, or that it saves water, or it leads to a reduction in motor vehicle use or it saves on infrastructure costs for government. Although all of these claims are either false and/or misleading, they have become accepted wisdom. Few have had the courage or the insight to challenge them.

One of those few is Patrick Troy.

In his 1996 book The Perils of Urban Consolidation, Patrick Troy, Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University, and a leading thinker on urban planning, squarely challenged the assumptions on which the urban densification principles are based. He pointed to flaws in the figures and arguments which have been used over and over again to support what is speciously called ‘smart growth’ arguing that these policies will produce ‘mean streets’, not ‘green streets’.

Until the 1970s, the development of new suburbs was largely left to the private sector. The many leafy, liveable suburbs like Netherby or Colonel Light Gardens south of Adelaide or Tea Tree Gully in the north-east with their large allotments and wide streets are an enduring testimony to what suburbs looked like before planning laws were introduced. Compare these old suburbs with the packed-like-sardines stuff foisted on young home-buyers today!

In last week’s Newsletter, we discussed opening up Adelaide’s northern plains to provide access to housing, employment, supply chains and tourism opportunities for the new $100bn maritime defence project based at North Haven.

The northern Adelaide plains are more than three times the size of metropolitan Adelaide – a city of over a million people that has taken over 150 years to get to where it is today. There is enough land in Adelaide’s north to last for centuries.

To enable first home-buyers easy access to housing – on quarter acre (1,000 sq metre) blocks if they want to kick a ball around and/or grow a few vegies, fruit trees and chickens – for around $300,000 and to permanently fix the ‘land’ problem, ensuring future generations do not have to suffer a similar fate, we need to do five things:

Where they have been applied, urban growth boundaries or zoning restrictions on the urban fringe must be removed. Residential development on the urban fringe needs to be made a ‘permitted use’.
Compulsory ‘Master Plan’ communities need to be abolished. If large developers wish to initiate Master Planned Communities, that’s fine, but don’t make them compulsory. This will allow smaller developers back into the market.
Allow the development of basic serviced allotments – ie, water, sewerage, electricity, stormwater, bitumen roads, street lighting and street signage. Additional services and amenities – such as lakes, entrance walls, childcare centres, bike trails, etc – can be optional extras if the developer wishes to provide them and the buyers are willing to pay for them.
Privatise planning approvals. Any qualified Town Planner should be permitted to certify that a development application complies with a Local Government’s Development Plan.
Abolish up-front infrastructure charges and so-called ‘developer contributions’ by Local or State Governments. All infrastructure services should be paid for through the rates system – ie, pay ‘as’ you use, not ‘before’ you use – like it was for the boomers! First home-buyers should not be singled out and forced to pay up-front for Local or State Government infrastructure expansion given that existing homeowners were not required to contribute when they bought in.

Thank you for support.

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner

13/07/2022 by Australian Family Party

In his brilliant book ‘The Subversive Family’, British writer Ferdinand Mount argued that marriage and the family, far from being oppressed by the ruling class, are in fact the chief bulwarks against authoritarianism.

Former US President Ronald Reagan, in his farewell address following his successful eight-year presidency said, “All great change begins at the dinner table”.

Western democracy was founded in Christianity and in the family. It’s why Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the co-authors of the ‘Communist Manifesto’, were determined to undermine both. Marx and Engels knew faith and family were the enemy. They did not like what families and people of faith people talked about around the dinner table.

Following the recent Federal election, the general agreement around this Party’s dinner table is that Australia is about to get mugged by reality. We’re heading for a recession. High mortgage rates, power blackouts, food and petrol shortages and price rises, and a housing affordability and rental crisis will lead, we conclude, to the collapse of the Albanese government.

For a glimpse of what we can expect, look no further than across the ditch to New Zealand. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s, unfettered, left-wing policies have totally failed that country. Whether it’s the health system, food and petrol price rises, five interest rate rises in a row, increasing crime, one of the worst housing affordability ratings in the world, numerous unfulfilled promises and a deliberate policy of dividing Kiwis along racial lines, New Zealand is Exhibit A. Once again, we are shown that just as there are physical laws that govern the physical universe, there are economic and social laws that cannot be mocked.

Political veteran Winston Peters, who once supported Prime Minister Ardern, says, “New Zealand is turning into a country we no longer recognise”.

New Zealanders have, however, finally woken up to Jacinda and, if she hasn’t resigned in the meantime, will comprehensively turf her out at the next election.

Here at home, whether the electorate will be ready to embrace a Peter Dutton-led Liberal Party following the failure of the Albanese government is another matter. Therefore, it is important that the electorate has some alternatives.

In our numerous internal post-election discussions along the lines of ‘What went right? What went wrong? and Where to from here?’ we need to first and foremost get the Australian Family Party’s name above the line! Being on the ballot paper is a good start and our Senate candidates’ names below the line is fine, but the blank box above the line was a major problem. To get our name above the line we need to lift our membership number past the 1,500 threshold and get registered federally.

Second, there were no less than seven ‘Faith, Family and/or Freedom’ parties and two well-known independents (Nick Xenophon and Rex Patrick) attracting a total of 16.0% of the primary vote. It is highly unlikely all will run again in 2025.

Third, on the policy front, as Ferdinand Mount stated, we need to be fierce advocates for the family as society’s key defender against tyranny. Accordingly, our Top 10 objectives are to STOP the following:

The ‘tax and control’ agenda – including opposing any digital identity legislation.
Fearmongering – climate change is not a threat to life on earth and nor is Covid.
The money-making racket that is renewable energy.
The indoctrination of children through the education system.¹
The undermining of faith-based schools and organisations.
The mental health epidemic.
Addictions to alcohol, gambling, drugs and pornography.
The decline in home ownership and the associated rental nightmare.
Social media harming the young.
Bureaucrats running the country.

An example of that last point was the recent Census which revealed the not-so-subtle attempt to undermine or delegitimize the place of faith in society.

In 2016, ‘No Religion’ was moved from the bottom of the list of options to the top. How puerile.

But it worked for them. This year, ‘No Religion’ polled 39% and the accompanying reporting was nothing short of jubilant. The ABC, naturally, was first out of the blocks with, “So Friedrich Nietzsche was right, God is dead, and we have killed him.”

It also quoted Philosopher Charles Taylor who warned, “Modern civilisation cannot but bring about a ‘death of God’. We have seen the rise of an ‘exclusive humanism’. We have swapped God for a culture of authenticity, or expressive individualism, in which people are encouraged to find their own way and discover their own fulfilment”.

Yet, had the first question been, “Do you believe in God?” or “Do you have a faith?”, I dare say the results would have been very different. After all, who wants ‘Religion’? Not me. As the old joke goes, “A lot of people are abandoning religion and going back to God”.

We are witnessing, in real time, a concerted effort to undermine Western civilisation.

We must stand firm. We must not yield.

Thank you for your support.

¹ “Pre-schoolers will learn about non-binary gender identity and become champions of reconciliation and sustainability under a proposed new curriculum for early learning.” – From national review of Early Years Learning and School Aged Care Frameworks, Federal Government, 2020.