There are a majority John, who can not read for themselves, they must have
someone else form their opinions for them; the corporate media has the
majority in thrall, which is what prompted Lang Hancock to proclaim once:
'son, the majority are usually wrong', besides, anyone who professes to be
non-racist, you know for sure then, they are as truthful as the bloke who
swears he has stopped wanking. The type are so good at lying to themselves,
that they really believe they would do a JC and willingly hang on a crucifix
to save someone else - until the time comes for them to prove it of course;
a time they studiously avoid ever having to face, preferring to spout their
religion from the safety of the pulpit, at others. Their cross is always an
imaginary one, NEVER a real one.
-----Original Message-----
From: I.J. (John) KENDLE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, 17 October 1998 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: One Nation
>I think perhaps you could spell out for me exactly what are the racist
>policies of One Nation. I have yet been unable to define any?
>
>Aren't the main issues in Australia today - crime/unemployment/drugs (CUD
>or DUC)?
>
>The sale of Telstra completely should proceed, but with controls similar to
>media/TV. The important thing about the GST, is that it will collect some
>taxation from profit shifters...for example, Hong Kong company owns Hotel
>in Australia. Australian net profit is reduced by management charges
>payable to Hong Kong Company. Result is that the management charges are
>taxed in HK at 15%. No income tax is payable in Australia. With a GST,
>10% taxation will be collected in Australia.
>
>On immigration, I am yet to see the arguments for and against, that
>demonstrate the effect on unemployment. At first glance, it would seem
>that immigration would add to unemployment?
>
>Both Liberal and ALP have zero tariff protection policies. The results of
>this are the decimation of manufacturing industries and the accompanying
>unemployment of low skilled workers.
>
>...........John
>
>----------
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: One Nation
>Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 1:42 AM
>
>One Nation is currently the only significant party that genuinely
>opposes both the ALP and the Coalition. A great deal of their popular
>support arises because of that and DESPITE their actual policies.
>
>They are compelled by the rigged electoral system to give preferences to
>one or the other, but they actually oppose both and direct their
>preferences tactically to achieve their objective of undermining both
>(e.g. they handed the ALP several seats in WA to punish the WA Liberals
>for accepting national Liberal Party policy to put One Nation last
>despite their own inclination to put the ALP last, but they handed the
>Coalition several seats in other states).
>
>The Democrats do not oppose the bipartisans but pretend to be
>indifferent between them to maintain a "balance of power". In practice
>they usually side with the ALP.
>
>The Greens nominally oppose both but more openly side with the ALP.
>
>One Nation, the Democrats and the Greens have very similar policies on
>such issues as Telstra, the GST and globalization, and also on zero-net
>immigration although the Greens now pretend otherwise.
>
>They differ strongly on racism (including Aboriginal policy and
>attitudes towards multiculturalism and immigrants, as opposed to
>immigration).
>
>Although Pauline Hanson did not vote against the anti-Neither
>legislation and is currently talking ignorant nonsense about "first-
>past-the-post" voting, the logic of that party's situation is that they
>are bound to end up supporting Proportional Representation just as the
>Democrats and Greens do.
>
>The difference is that when they do they are more likely to put up a
>fight about it rather than passively accept their exclusion from any
>representation in the House of Representatives as the Greens and
>Democrats do.
>
>The widespread celebration of the fact that One Nation won no seats in
>the House of Representatives will also be used as an argument against
>Neither's campaign for PR. When PR is introduced, a party with 8% of the
>vote will get 8% of the seats and that means One Nation will be a
>significant force in the House of Representatives. (They will be
>significant on such issues as Telstra, and the GST where the major
>parties are divided - not on their racist policies where
>they will be voted down by 92% majorities instead of being able to
>pressure the other parties into making concessions by preference threats
>as at present).
>
>Neither has to face that issue squarely.
>
>We cannot oppose the "two party state" and support PR without admitting
>that this does indeed mean we support One Nation being fully represented
>along with the Democrats, Greens and other minor parties in a
>representative House of Representatives.
>
>That makes it all the more important for Neither to clearly oppose One
>Nation and add them to the list of parties to put equal last, despite
>their (anticipated) support for PR.
>
>We want to reduce their representation by reducing the number of people
>who support them, not by denying the elementary democratic right of
>representation in Parliament to our political opponents.
>
>The media rejoicing about the extinction of One Nation just shows how
>out of touch they are. One Nation is now twice the size of the Democrats
>and larger than the National Party. They have not been defeated but
>merely denied representation. They will not be defeated
>until they have been given representation and thus helped to demonstrate
>that their policies are just as bankrupt as the ALP and the Coalition.
>
>Neither should be seen as the OTHER significant force in Australian
>politics that genuinely opposes both the ALP and the Coalition - for
>very different reasons.
>
>There are at least as many people who do oppose the two party state with
>a progressive outlook as there are who oppose it with a reactionary
>outlook.
>
>There is an obvious vacuum on the left of Australian politics and we
>should aim to fill it.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send an email to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
>
>For help with this mailing list, look at
>http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
>
