The Real Objectives of the Second
An Exposure of International Finance
by Eric D. Butler
following material, printed in booklet form around late 1939, first appeared in
serial form in the Australian publication The New Times. The document
is a quest for the truth to emerge from the tissue of untruthfulness which led,
so many times in the twentieth century, to war.
Humanity has once again stood at the crossroads. The choice: Life
or Death. Death has been chosen for it. Once again we will witness the terrible
tragedy of the world's youth being crucified upon the altar of war. The last war
solved nothing. It left the world an embittered shambles, out of which a new and
more terrible war has been born. My generation is again to be asked to die in
the mud. In times of peace we have been crucified by the rotten economic system.
In times of war we are blown to hell to preserve that system. The time has come
for us to pause and think...
Much has been written and much has been said about the startling
ramifications of International Finance and its fight for complete world domination.
Events over the past few years have given thinking people more than sufficient
evidence upon which to build their investigations. But in view of certain moves
being made and certain views which are receiving quite an undue amount of publicity
of late, a comprehensive survey of the story and development of the power of International
Finance in practically every country of the world may prove some sort of a guide
to the rapid march of events.
Possibly the most significant move being publicised
in various quarters at the present juncture is the agitation for some sort of
International Government, and the utilisation of the crisis in Europe to foster
this idea. For various reasons many sincere people are accepting this idea as
a solution to the problem of war. That is why the mania of International Finance
for some sort of centralised world government must be exposed and opposed most
vigorously. Our fight against the Internationalists can only be fought in Australia.
Australia is one of the countries which can best stand up to the pressure for
submission of national government to an international government, if we only realise
the gravity of the situation. A further step in the plan to bring this country
under the tyranny of such centralisation of power is now being attempted. I refer
to the move for the Abolition of State Parliaments. All over the world Finance
is working for more centralisation of administration. This achieved, it is then
an easy task to control the centralisers, and through them the whole of society.
The World-Centre of Finance
close student of the history of the International Financiers knows that the centre
of administration has changed many times. At the time of Napoleon the Rothschilds
dominated the position on the Continent. However, the transfer of power to London
gradually took place until early in this century, when the power of the New York
group, centred in Wall Street, began to assume tremendous proportions. During
and since the last war [World War I] the latter has rapidly increased its power,
particularly over the destinies of the British Empire. This was accomplished when
they gained virtual control of the Bank of England and all its ramifications.
Even powerful banking groups, such as J.P. Morgan and Co., sink into insignificance
compared with the Kuhn, Loeb and Company group, which came out of the last war
with the British Empire largely under its indirect control; financed and exploited
the Russian Revolution; operated in Japan from 1900 onwards until they were ejected
and have been for some time engaged in an attempt to finally establish themselves
in China, where they first started in 1892.
The same group assisted Hitler
to power, but he has apparently been one of the very few national leaders who
has tried to work contrary to their plan. The controller of this group is Felix
Warburg, whose father, Paul Warburg, was well known as the "Father of the
United States of America Federal Reserve Board".
The history of this
group is more than interesting. Before the war a de facto dictatorship was imposed
upon the policy of the United States of America by the "concentration of
banks" controlled by Warburg. There was such a public outcry that President
Wilson, who was a protégé of the Kuhn, Loeb and Co. group, was forced
to set up a commission of enquiry. The findings were little short of astounding.
A banking trust did exist. It included five principle banks, as well as numerous
financial and industrial groups scattered throughout America and other parts of
the world. In adding together the capital sums represented by the banks which
formed part of the "trust" and by businesses dependent upon them, the
commission arrived at the astronomical figure of 22,245,000,000 dollars. In 1912
all this money-power was controlled by one man-Jacob Schiff. The reader can well
imagine the amount now being controlled, after almost thirty years of intensive
activity and exploitation in all parts of the world.
The commission concluded
its report by saying: "The powerful grip of these men is placed upon the
lever which controls all credit, and its wheels turn or stop at their signal."
Ironically enough, the effect of the report was used to advantage by the banking
group to resurrect a scheme put forward by Paul Warburg in 1907. The scheme was
the formation of the Federal Reserve Board, which, in fact, further tightened
the grip of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. In regard to that body and its power, I can do
no better than to quote the opinion of Sir Josiah Stamp, a Director of the Bank
of England, who, in an interview published in the "National Bank Monthly"
for February, 1926, said: "Never in the history of the world has so much
power been vested in a small body of men as in the Federal Reserve Board. These
men have the welfare of the world in their hands, and they could upset the rest
of us either deliberately or by some unconscious action."
This is the
group which has fomented the present conflagration, as a part of their fight for
complete world domination, and one can understand the suggestion, put forward
in Britain by one eminent thinker, that the best way to avoid the complete destruction
of Europe would be to threaten a few selected individuals in New York with a small
part of the suffering they seem so keen to impose on the rest of the people. Unfortunately,
these individuals are very modest in their actions and very rarely figure in the
limelight. Like most reptiles, they prefer the dark, where they can work quietly-and
Finance and the Last War
the last war broke upon Europe in 1914 the New York group saw their opportunity
to move forward in their plan for world domination. One of the most significant
statements on record in connection with that conflict was made by Mr. Walter Hines
Page, then U.S. Ambassador in London, when he cabled President Wilson upon the
outbreak of war. He said: "The British Empire is delivered into our hands."
The result of the war was to prove the truth of this statement.
of the cream of Britain's manpower was dying in France, the debt to the American
bankers, who were making tremendous profits, was steadily rising. Those Britons
who survived active service came home to start paying tribute to this group by
way of taxation, and still more taxation.
In his book, "America Conquers
Britain," published in 1930, Mr. Ludwell Denny, a well-known American banking
"Many nations may laugh at our State department, but
all most tremble before our Federal Reserve Board . . . . High money rates in
the United States of America early in 1929, for instance, forced an increase in
the official bank rates at once in England, ten European countries, in two Latin
American countries, and two in the Far East: and in almost every case that action
restricted business and brought suffering to millions of foreign workers. That
blow hit Britain hardest of all."
This statement clearly indicates a
situation in which this body is enabled to hold in the hollow of its hand the
welfare, not only of the United States of America, but also-while monetary policy
is dictated from outside a country's borders-of the whole world. An international
Government would further strengthen this domination by the International Group,
while further weakening the power of the people in any country, such as Australia,
to break the stranglehold.
Nationally, we are finding the task a tremendous
strain on our limited resources. Internationally, it would be hopeless.
one of the most significant statements on public record in connection with the
power which the International Financiers obtained as a result of the last war,
was made by Mr. Otto Kuhn, of Kuhn. Loeb and Co. at Ottawa in 1923, when he said:
"There was a short period after the war when we were very anxious. But we
now have the situation well in hand." Whether Mr. Kuhn was speaking literally
or not has been a moot point. But there is no doubting the fact that they "now
have the situation well in hand." Whether the stranglehold can be broken
is the urgent problem confronting civilisation.
Conquered by Wall Street
Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, British Ambassador
to the United States during the war (until February, 1918), when speaking of the
Wall Street group, called Mr. Schiff "the arch-Jew", pointed out that
he and Mr. Warburg dominated the Wilson Administration, and were working to get
control of Britain. This and other enlightening information will be found in "The
Letters and Friendships of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice," published in 1929.
first step towards obtaining control was the rise of Mr. Montague Norman to Governorship
of the Bank of England in 1920. Prior to this, Mr. Norman had been a very obscure
member of the London branch of an American banking firm. Immediately upon his
rise to the Governorship, Dr. Oliver Sprague, of the Federal Reserve Board, was
sent over from America to help him with his task. When Mr. Montague Norman went
to America to discuss the question of the War Debts he was accompanied by Stanley
Baldwin, who immediately afterwards had a meteoric rise to the Prime Ministership
of Great Britain, and played such a traitor's role in reducing Britain to a second-rate
Power. Possibly his crowning feat, on behalf of the financial gang who brought
him to power, was the part he played in having Edward VIII forced off the throne
because of his challenge to the financial oligarchy.
When Mr. Montague Norman
returned with the Debt Settlement, Mr. Bonar Law, Prime Minister of Britain at
that time, is reported to have said: "If I sign this I will be cursed for
generations." Nevertheless, it was signed, and the tragic story, up until
the present time, is one which is painful to all those British citizens who pride
themselves that they have a democratic Government which can represent the wishes
of the people.
Although the Government of Britain pawned the nation to the
private banks during the last war by borrowing what it had the sovereign right
to provide itself, the fact remains that production and consumption were not rigidly
tied to an artificial money shortage. It is only in times of "peace"
that that happens. Although some 8 million men were withdrawn from production
and actively engaged in destruction in France, the remainder of the population,
using the labours of women and girls, was able to build up one of the greatest
industrial machines the world has ever seen. After the war Britain was in a position
to provide a standard of living never dreamt of before the war.
may doubt the power of the International Financial group have only to review the
history of what took place. Mr. Montague Norman immediately put Wall Street's
deflation policy into operation, and within thee years unemployment figures rose
from 240,000 to 1,900,000. Just think of it! A nation which finished the war with
an even greater industrial machine, reduced to chaos within a few years by the
orders of an outside group! The result of that policy has been the terrible conditions
existing in Britain ever since, such as the depressed areas. Men who fought to
"save democracy" were seen in thousands trying to obtain a living by
selling matches on the streets or the like.
No wonder Mr. Bonar Law said that
he would be cursed for generations. It is also of interest to note that the American
financiers asked of Britain six times the financial tribute asked of the so-called
defeated countries. The policy of Wall Street since that time has been the guiding
power in the affairs of the British Empire.
Should there be some people who
are still not convinced that Britain has come under the direct domination of the
Wall Street group since the war, let us also briefly consider what happened in
1931. The memoirs of the late Lord Snowden, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer
in the Ramsay MacDonald Labour Cabinet, reveal the fact that the Wall Street group
demanded the reduction in the British unemployment dole. Lord Snowden said: "On
Saturday, the 22nd August, the situation was hectic. The Bank of England submitted
to Mr. Harrison, the President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, the tentative
suggestion for a reduction of unemployment payments . . . . Mr. Harrison replied
by telephone that, while he was not in a position to give the answer until he
had consulted his financial associates, his opinion was that it would give satisfactory
This led the way for the break up of the Labour Government
and the formation of the National Government, which reduced the dole as ordered
from New York. The same group, through their control of the bank of England, were
responsible for the visit of Otto Niemeyer to Australia to also give us our instructions:
and still we talk about British freedom! The Empire is in the hands of an alien
group which knows neither country nor creed.
In passing, it is also interesting
to note that the great General Electric Co. of America, which is a powerful subsidiary
of the New York financial group, owns practically the entire electrical manufacturing
industry of Great Britain.
The Bank of
There was never a greater delusion than the idea of the Bank
of England being controlled by the British Government. In 1929, when the Macmillan
Committee was making its investigations, one of the witnesses, Mr. Samuel Gurney,
was asked: "Is it not a principle laid down by the Act of 1844 that in all
its dealings with the public the Banking Department of the Bank of England is
to carry on its transactions with reference to its own interests alone, and not
with any view to the public advantage?" The witness agreed.
Harvey, Deputy Governor, in giving evidence, as much more to the point when he
said: "The Bank of England is practically free to do whatever it likes
Although much time and money was spent in investigating the affairs of the
Bank by the Macmillan Committee, very little was actually discovered. Mr. Paul
Einzig, in his admiring biography of Mr. Norman, wrote: "The efforts of the
Macmillan Committee to throw more light upon the machine of the Bank of England
failed almost completely
Indeed, the evidence of Mr. Norman is a study in
non committal and evasive answers." Whether the ownership of the Bank of
England is under direct foreign influence was never proved, but there is sufficient
evidence to lead one to this conclusion. (Lord Cunliffe, the previous Governor
to Mr. Montagu Norman, was partner in the international banking firm of Goschens
and Cunliffe, also connected with the Kuhn, Loeb and Co. group.)
history of the Bank shows that the international atmosphere has become more pronounced.
Mr. Norman was obliged to tell the Macmillan Committee that he had been devoting
a great deal of his time after the war to two things.
The first was "the
stabilisation of foreign countries which had lost what they possessed before the
war", and the second was the setting up of central banks in foreign countries.
This is all in line with the idea of a central World-Government, controlled by
the International Group.
In view of the crisis which occurred over Czechoslovakia,
in September 1938, when the move to push Britain into war failed, it is more than
interesting to read the history of the Bank of England's activities in that country,
as revealed in Mr. Bruce Lockhart's Retreat from Glory, published in 1934. From
1919 to 1922 Mr. Lockhart was Commercial Secretary at the British Legation at
Prague. He says: "Before the war there had been a large bank called the Anglo-Oesterreichsche
Bank in Vienna-a Jewish concern with some English capital, and with branches all
over Old Austria."
This bank fell into difficulties, and the Bank of
England, to which it owed money, decided to put it on its feet again. Mr. Spencer
Smith was representing the Bank of England, and upon arriving at Vienna had some
difficulty, in which he needed the diplomatic services of Mr. Lockhart. Mr. Lockhart
relates: "All the assets of the Viennese bank were in Austrian Treasury notes,
which had been deposited in Prague. While the Austrians claimed that the notes
were entitled to be valued in Czech currency, the Czechs were equally insistent
that they were not." Czechoslovakia had formerly used Austrian currency,
but when this paper money became worthless in the inflation of 1921, the Czechoslovakian
Government held up the value of their money, and on a given date separated it
from Austrian currency by stamping notes in the country with a Czechoslovakian
"Unfortunately," says Mr. Lockhart, "the Jews in the
A.O. Bank had been too far-seeing. Instead of sending the banknotes into Czechoslovakia
on the given day, they had transferred interest-bearing Treasury notes. The Czechs
had stamped the bank notes. Greed for interest had defeated its own ends ....
If the 148,000,000 Treasury notes of the A.O. Bank had a Czech value, they were
worth over 1,000,000. If they had an Austrian value they were worthless. Without
assets the Governor (of the Bank of England) could not go ahead with his scheme."
This was where the services of Mr. Lockhart came in. He was to try and persuade
the Czechoslovakian Government to make this worthless pile of paper (if Austrian)
into a million sterling (if Czech). The Government felt disinclined to do anything
of the kind, but in the end they gave the A.O. Bank a loan of 148,000,000 kronen
at 1 per cent. Six months later, as a reward, the Czechs were allowed to float
a loan of £10,000,000 in New York and London. In this manner that section
of Central Europe, represented by the parties interested in the A.O. Bank, was
brought under the control of the Bank of England.
Apart from his efforts at
"helping" foreign countries, Mr. Montague Norman also played a very
important part in the establishment of the Bank for International Settlements
at Basle in 1930. Mr. Einzig, in his biography of Mr. Norman, says: "As usual,
he remained entirely behind the scenes
In spite of this, he had more to
do with it than anybody else."
It would take far too much space to give
in detail the interlocking of the Bank Directorates in Britain, but, needless
to say, the entire policy of the "Big Five" is controlled by the Bank
The only time that its policy of keeping money scarce has been
challenged was in 1928, when the Midland Bank imported some £6 millions
of gold from New York, with the view to creating a credit expansion; but the Bank
of England immediately counteracted this attempted interference with the official
policy by sterilising the imported gold.
Apart from many activities in all
parts of the world, the latest move by Mr. Montague Norman for the formation of
gigantic combines and amalgamations controlled by finance reveals an insidious
attempt to get complete ownership of British industry. A Bankers' Industrial Development
Company was formed in 1931, mainly from finance supplied by the Bank of England.
At the head of this company was Sir Guy Granet, Mr. Montague Norman's lieutenant,
who, interestingly enough, was partner in Higginson and Company, international
bankers, associated with Lee, Higginson and Company, who were named in the American
report on banking activities in 1912 as one of the five firms constituting the
United States Money Trust. It is significant that all these gentlemen come from
the good old International Banking school.
As far as Australia is concerned,
most readers of the New Times are familiar with the manner in which this country
is tied up with the Banking Group in Britain. Apart from the fact that the Commonwealth
Bank Board receives its fortnightly advice from the Bank of England, the Overseas
Group in this country-the Bank of Australasia, the E.S. and A. Bank, and the Union
Bank-is directly connected with the Bank of England.
The tremendous ramifications
of the Bank of England and its subsidiary groups would take volumes to relate
in detail, and yet, it, in turn, appears to be under the domination of another
group in New York, where, at the apex as it were of a number of great Banking
Houses, is to be found the Wall Street group. No wonder that Sir Josiah Stamp
said that a small group of men in America had sufficient power to make or break
the world. Before going on to deal with the activities of this group in relation
to the present European situation, it should be of considerable interest to make
a somewhat closer investigation into their activities prior to and during the
How War Was Prolonged
to the last war the International Financiers were well entrenched in practically
every country in Europe, and such were the ramifications of their interests that
during the last war there was the ironic spectacle of Max Warburg acting as financial
adviser to the German Government, while his brother, Paul Warburg, was financial
advisor to the American Government: and when the Peace Treaty was arranged they
or their puppets represented both sides.
The tactics by which they prolonged
the war have already received some prominence in the New Times. By so doing they
were able to obtain a stranglehold of death upon the Allies, particularly Britain,
and thus weaken democratic government-which these financiers appear to regard
as an obstacle to their plans.
Apart from the Briey Basin scandal, which I
will deal with, another incident of the war, which has received very little publicity,
helped the financiers to prolong the war, while, at the same time, preparing the
ground for the revolution in Russia. The Allied peoples were told that when the
"Russian Steamroller" went into action in the East, in the autumn of
1915, the Germans would quickly collapse. The real facts are as follow, and are
related in the "War Memoirs of Mr. Lloyd George": Vickers had the contract,
with the result that, out of 7,000,000 men put into the trenches, there were 3,800,000
casualties. It is interesting to note that Vickers was founded and financed by
Sir Ernest Cassel, friend and associate of Mr. Schiff, of Wall Street. Sir Basil
Zaharoff was also connected with this group, which was able, because of its international
character, to arm and finance both sides.
Briey Basin Scandal
Possibly no better material has ever been produced
in connection with one of the most damnable episodes of the last war than an article
published in the New Times on August 4, 1939. This was the substance of
an address given by W. Leech in Belfast, Ireland, and I quote it in detail:- "The
front line between the Allied Troops in France and Britain on the one side, and
those of Germany on the other, ran, roughly, from Dunkirk on the N.E. coast of
France (opposite Dover) to approximately near Basel, a town in the corner of France
near the borders of Switzerland.
"Down near this southern portion was
an important fortified French town called Verdun. It was held, of course, by the
French troops. Now the front line ran in front of Verdun, swinging through the
province of Lorraine. "About 30 miles east by south of Verdun, it ran through
a very rich iron ore and coal mining country called the BRIEY BASIN.
possession of this area, for its iron and coal, was of the utmost importance to
Germany, for she was inadequately supplied with such materials for a prolonged
war. She therefore entered the district early in the war, and remained in unchallenged
possession of it throughout. The vital necessity for Germany of holding Briey
was confirmed by a confidential document addressed to the then German Chancellor,
Bethmann-Hollweg, in May 1915, which said that 'if the production of the iron
ore, etc., was disturbed for Germany, the war would be lost. That the German Empire
could not possibly continue the war, for 70 per cent. of all her iron ore for
munition making came from Briey.'
"Now it is at least conceivable that
the French and British staffs were also aware of this-and in fact they did know
it. "That being so, it would have seemed that a successful prosecution of
the War on behalf of the Allies would have necessitated an immediate attack on
Briey; to be captured for the Allies use, or destroyed in order to prevent the
Germans using it.
"But what do we find?
"We learn from the officers
and men in this area that this great iron and coal country, now in the possession
of the enemy, was to be left undisturbed, by orders of the French General Staff!
The French in the immediate front of Briey actually had to remain passive and
watch the German munition makers at their work. They watched them working full
steam ahead, turning out coal and iron, erecting smelting factories, and producing
millions of tons of raw materials for munitions at top speed.
as this story may seem, it is stranger still when we remember that had it not
been for a mistake at the American Army Headquarters when an offensive launched
by the Americans in October, 1918, threatened the German occupation of Briey,
we would probably never have heard of this remarkable story. It was the Americans
who 'spilled the beans.'
"Prior to this, however, the tranquility on
this part of the front aroused the suspicions of certain French officers, who,
observing the feverish activity of the German munition makers, immediately ordered
a bombardment of the area.
"For this patriotic piece of work one might
expect these officers to be applauded, but again what do we find? Monsieur Barthe,
at the official investigations, testifies:- "'I affirm that during the War
a General was officially reprimanded for having bombarded Briey. That the military
Chiefs forbade the disturbance of this area, and among those officers who, not
wishing to give in to these orders, and observing the activities of the Germans,
went and bombarded it, a number have been severely punished.'
Albert Thomas, the French Minister of Munitions, testifies as follows:-
at the end of 1916, during Briand's second Ministry, I demanded the bombardment
of Briey several times. The War Minister announced that he had transmitted these
orders to the General Staff, but that they had not been executed, the reason given
being the insufficient number of guns and aeroplanes. To which I replied, that
as there were sufficient for open towns, there must be sufficient for Briey.'
"This peculiar behaviour, one Minister arguing with the other, went on
until February, 1917: 27 months of war- when, owing to the determined demands
of some artillery officers outside Verdun, the General Staff gave way and permitted
a bombardment over Briey.
"'Deputy Eynac testifies as foIlows:-
orders for the bombardment of Briey were established under a secret document,
and the raids placed in charge of an officer, sent to us by the General Staff,
named Lieutenant Lejeune. It transpired that this officer so skilfully commanded
the bombing operations that NO damage to Briey was accomplished at all!'
there be a more ironical situation?
"Here you have a French officer under
the directions of the French High Command actually preventing the destruction
of the Briey Area, where he knew that Germany secured 70 per cent. of her iron
"At this point, let us estimate the cost in blood of this
action of Lieutenant Lejeune and the French High Command. The nearest sector of
any importance, from which I am able to get casualty lists, from Briey is Verdun.
During the five months, February to June, 1917, after Lejeune's treachery- the
French lost 179,000 men killed and missing (not including officers), and 263,000
injured, a total of 442,000 men."
* * * * * *
"Who was the unseen hand
behind the French General Staff? " Well, let us find out who owned Briey.
"Briey was French territory, and we find that this area was owned by
a huge industrial corporation in France called the Comite des Forges. The guiding
hand and controller of this huge concern was a French 'gentleman' called Francois
de Wendel who was also an M.P. and a Director of the Bank of France.
Francois had a brother, and before the war it was considered advisable for this
brother to become a naturalised German. This was duly accomplished, and, what
was more important, he also became an M.P. in Germany.
"During the official
investigation it was discovered that a gentleman's agreement existed between Francois
de Wendel and Herr Thyssen, the great German industrialist, to the effect that
all the profits arising from the Briey Area would, in the event of war, be shared
"Thyssen was also a member of the management committee of
the German Reichsbank. He also had a son, for whom it was arranged that he should
become a naturalised Frenchman.
"There is the solution of the mystery
of Briey, perhaps one of the greatest mysteries of the World War. Two bankers,
one in France and the other in Germany, so powerful that they could bring influence
to bear upon the General Staff of France and actually prevent the destruction
of that which they regarded as the source of huge profits-the Briey Establishments.
Generals and officers who were sufficiently patriotic to disregard G.H.Q. were
degraded: at least 179,000 French soldiers died.
"The officer who so
skilfully planned the raids over Briey, Lieutenant Lejeune, was an employee of
the Comite des Forges, and admitted as such by de Wendel at the investigation.
"Let me conclude with the words of Monsieur Barthe at the investigation:
"'I affirm that, in order to safeguard private business and banking interests
our military chiefs were ordered NOT to bombard the establishments of the Briey
Area, which were being exploited by the enemy. I affirm that our aviation service
received instructions to respect the blast furnaces in which the enemy steel was
being made, and that a general who WISHED to bombard Briey was severely punished.'"
International Finance and Russia
who have adhered to the viewpoint that Russia was playing a role similar to that
played by America, under the domination of Wall Street, have so far had their
predictions proved right. In fact, one cannot overlook the evidence that Soviet
Russia-which does not necessarily mean Socialism-was brought into being by the
Wall Street group.
Most of the views expressed about Russia have been, unfortunately,
of a very superficial nature. With those who say, "But what about the tremendous
material progress in that country?", I agree. But Russia has done no more-if
as much-in 20 years than we took possibly 50 or more years to do as pioneers.
That proves very little, except that Russia has proved a great field for exploitation
by industrialisation. In spite of all our material progress, we have been getting
further and further under the domination of Finance. Finance may conceivably see
that we are all fed and housed, for example, but at the same time can build up
a great system of bureaucratic dictatorship, and completely crush the rights of
the individual. This is what has happened in Russia, and is what appears to be
the fate intended for those who survive the present war.
Facts Be Denied?
It is not my wish to discredit the many high-minded
leaders which the Socialist movements have produced, but the evidence that Finance
has used these movements can no longer be ignored by any person who will honestly
examine the facts. For example, most supporters of the "Left" have a
very high regard for Mr. George Lansbury, former chairman of the British Labour
Party. I would advise them to read his book, "Looking Backwards and Forwards,"
published in 1935, in which he relates the manner in which Lenin and Trotsky were
financed, as far back as 1907, by American Finance. Incidentally, Trotsky also
admits it in his "History of the Russian Revolution." Apparently, the
fact that New York financiers were working to foment trouble in Russia was known
prior to the Revolution, as, in the course of a debate in the Russian Duma, it
was alleged that M. Protopopoff, head of the last Czarist Government, had been
bribed by one of the Warburgs at Stockholm.
The memoirs of Sir George Buchanan,
British Ambassador to Russia until 1918, state that Rasputin, whose control over
the Empress brought the Russian Royal Family into disrepute, was "largely
financed by certain Jewish bankers."
In 1915 Paul Rodzianko quotes the
President of the Russian Duma as saying: "Some people are in favour of peace,
but they dare not speak. Rasputin will not work for peace, for he is run by a
ring of banks who make money out of the war."
Possibly the most monumental
piece of evidence that the International Group financed the Revolution was the
official report of the French High Commissioner in the United States, early in
1919, from material supplied by the U.S. Secret Service. The report brought forward
indisputable evidence that the firm of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. had fomented and financed
the Russian Revolution. Furthermore, it declared that the same group had the contracts
for the industrialisation of Russia beforehand. We will examine further evidence
of this later.
In his memoirs, "Through Thirty Years" (1924), Mr.
H. Wickham Steed, editor of the London Times during the war, describes
Messrs. Schiff and Warburg as "akin to, if not identical with," the
men who shipped Trotsky and other revolutionaries to Russia in 1917.
report, which appeared in the New York Times of March 24, 1917, is also
more than sufficient to indicate that the Wall Street group was interested in
the Revolution. Mr. George Kennan was reported as relating at a meeting that Mr.
Schiff had heavily financed revolutionary propaganda amongst 50,000 Russian prisoners
of war in Japan as far back as 1905.
This New York meeting was held in celebration
of the outbreak of the Russian Revolution, and at it a message was read out from
Schiff expressing his pleasure at the achievement of "what we had hoped and
struggled for these long years." It is rather an interesting thing to see
a member of the most powerful Banking House in the world expressing his satisfaction
in such a manner.
Further evidence that this Banking Group financed the Revolution
was found in the documents seized from the Bolsheviks by the Kerensky Government,
and later established in the Sisson Report in the United States. These documents
named Warburg's Bank as providing large funds for munitions for Trotsky.
Mr. James W. Gerard (former U.S.A. Ambassador to
Germany) has stated on numerous occasions that Bolshevism was being financed by
America and Britain lending money to Germany, which was then re-lent to Russia.
There is evidence that International Finance found the money for the first Five-Year
Plan. The London Daily Express of January 16, 1932, said that international
financiers in the City of London had borrowed £50,000,000 in France and
America at 2 per cent, lent it to Germany at 8 per cent, and Germany had lent
it to Russia at 15 per cent. More recently Britain made a great Government-guaranteed
trade credit available to Russia, which Russia obviously did not require for trade
purposes, as she was selling more in Britain than she bought there.
policy of debt, which means taxation, is still being furthered in Russia is shown
by a recent report which appeared in the Melbourne Communist paper, The Guardian,
on August 23, 1939. It proclaims a record Soviet loan in connection with the Government
Five-Year Plan. The stupendous sum of six billion roubles, which, the report says,
the people over-subscribed in ten days, seems obviously absurd, and one presumes
that the only group capable of "finding" such a sum is the Banks. Even
the most eulogistic supporter of the "prosperity" of the Russians would
find it a tax on his credulity to believe that the people could find these billions
of roubles in 10 days. I have been unable to discover any evidence of whether
it came from external sources or not. If the Banks found it internally it is equally
damning, as this means more debt. Although the Banks may be nationalised, this
in itself is a dangerous admission. Mr. Montagu Norman is reported as saying,
in connection with nationalisation: "We would welcome it."
of nationalisation and socialisation means the building of a vast State bureaucracy,
with the individual unable to obtain any redress whatever. This policy suits International
Finance, and all over the world similar ideas are being carefully fostered along
the lines adopted in Russia. This fact, coupled with Russia's foreign policy,
has made many people realise that the Internationalists appear to have as their
ultimate aim a World Bureaucracy-and that the "Left" group is being,
consciously or unconsciously, used to further the idea.
When an article entitled "Warning Europe"
first appeared in England, with the warning that a European war was being fomented
which would mean that Russia and America would emerge as dictators of the world,
the suggestion that Russia would play her present role was ridiculed. No good
purpose can be served by Communists or any other Russian apologists merely giving
opinions which have been moulded by years of constant propaganda. A close study
of official statements over the past 20 years indicates one policy which has not
wavered. That policy is to use war to further the plan for world revolution.
back on November 26, 1920, Lenin proclaimed: "Our salvation would be more
readily assured if the Imperialist Powers became embroiled in a war."
February 21, 1935, the Political Bureau of the Communist International, after
being addressed by Stalin, passed a resolution in which it said: "The Political
Bureau is definitely convinced that a new world war is absolutely inevitable,
but explains this as the obvious preparation for the world revolution. With the
aim of self-preservation, and in the interests of the world revolutionary movement,
the Soviet Government must do all possible to enter the camp of the States, which
build the strongest coalitions."
One of the most remarkable pieces of
evidence of Russia's policy will be found outlined in the book, "La Greve
est un Combat," by Lozovsky, recently appointed head of the Moscow Foreign
Office and principle adviser to Molotov. His chief aim in life, according to his
own account, is the overthrow of the existing democracies by revolution, fomented
as a result of war.
Lozovsky's immediate chief in the Comintern, Manuoulsky,
declared, in March, at the Congress of the Russian Communist Party, that: "This
war will be the most just, the most holy, that has ever been fought in the history
of mankind; a war which will necessarily stir up a whole series of revolutionary
outbreaks within the enemy ranks, and which will break up and demoralise the ranks
more remarkable were the remarks made by Stalin on March 10, 1939, when addressing
the Bolshevik Congress. He said; "The policy of non-intervention means conniving
at aggression, giving free rein to war; reveals an eagerness to allow all the
belligerents to sink deep into the mire of war, to encourage them surreptitiously
in this, to allow them to weaken and exhaust one another, and then, when they
have become weak enough, to appear on the scene with fresh strength; to appear,
of course, 'in the interests of peace,' and to dictate conditions to the enfeebled
belligerents. It is cheap and it serves its purpose." (My emphasis) [No
emphasis in text]
Well, there should be no need to discuss the matter any
further after this last statement. It also explains the Communists' remarkable
attitude in connection with the present conflict. On September 15, 1939, the secretary
of the Australian Communist Party proclaimed in the Sydney Daily News-which
paper, incidentally, the Bank of New South Wales is interested in to the extent
of 60,000 pounds-that Australian man power should be sent to Europe to fight Hitler.
However, when Russia took over the biggest part of Poland, the Communist World
Circus threw another of its many somersaults, and we now have the same people
talking Peace. This, of course, fits in with Stalin's remarks, which I have just
quoted, and we can imagine the sort of peace they require.
Russia has taken
the first step towards dominating Europe, as predicted. In view of this situation,
the following prediction, which appeared in an English journal on September 16,
1939, is more than significant: "The Russian attitude towards the Hitler
regime will be 'liquidated,' and Germany, presented with an active enemy on the
Polish frontier, will find herself between two fires, a position impossible to
defend. Disorder and revolution in Germany will unseat a deflated Hitler. Reconstruction,
and a new convenient note on the propaganda organ, perhaps a touch of the whip
of financial deflation, will convince the Germans of the essential unity of their
ideals with Mother Russia."
Already the attitude of the Russian propaganda
machine towards the Nazi regime has undergone a dramatic change, and we saw a
remarkable report in the Australian press on November 5, 1939, quoting Pravda,
semi-official Soviet paper, that: "The position of the Finnish Foreign Minister
(M. Erkko) is similar to that of the former Polish Foreign Minister (Colonel Beck),
when he provoked war with Germany."
This recalls the attitude of Stalin
in connection with the Sudeten question, when the whole of the propaganda from
the Communists and other supporters of the "Left" urged Britain to threaten
to fight; and yet on March 10, 1939, Stalin, speaking for the first time since
the annexation of Austria and Sudeten lands by Germany, displayed such remarkable
tolerance towards Germany as to upset sympathisers of the "Left." He
even went so far as to attack the democracies for plotting "to poison the
atmosphere and provoke a conflict between Germany and Soviet Russia."
in 1939 it was disclosed that Russia had made arrangements to sell oil supplies
to both Germany and Italy in the event of these two countries being involved in
war with Britain.
As indicated by the Krivitsky articles, which I reviewed
in the New Times, and which I will briefly refer to again, Stalin has been
following a surface policy of hostility towards Germany, while his real policy
has been one of appeasement, with a view to using her. Looking at events in retrospect,
the following report, which appeared in the London Daily Herald, mouthpiece
of British Trade Unionism, on January 25, 1939, takes on a terrible significance:
"Mr. W. N. Ewer, the diplomatic correspondent of this paper, reported that
the Nazi Government was 'now almost convinced that, in the event of a European
war, the Soviet union would adopt a policy of neutrality and non-intervention.'"
With the signing of the Russo-German pact, the last doubts were removed, and
the "war for world revolution" began.
When I first reviewed the articles written by General
Krivitsky for the Saturday Evening Post, several objections were raised
that these were faked. Briefly, the suggestion that Krivitsky was the only man
to escape the Red Army purge and escape to America was ridiculed from only one
source-the Communists. Apart from the overwhelming evidence supplied by the Post,
I had sufficient evidence from a wide variety of other sources to leave little
doubt about the authenticity of the articles.
It was, first of all, suggested
that the Saturday Evening Post had been "spoofed"-until the Post
squashed that argument by a complete exposure of the "exposure." Since
then the articles have been produced in book form, while a few months ago General
Krivitsky appeared at a public and official hearing, held by the immigration authorities
in America, to consider the extension of his visa, which was granted.
then he has given official evidence before the American Dies Committee investigating
the activities of the Soviet Secret Police in America, while the Communists and
other apologists have maintained a very discreet silence.
Apart from the fact
that I notice that several influential journals in England accept the articles
as the most damning to ever appear in connection with the intrigue of the Soviet,
the most significant thing is the manner in which all Krivitsky's predictions
of Russia's foreign policy have proved correct.
I have before me a cutting
from Smith's Weekly, with a lengthy denunciation of these articles when they first
appeared, and one of the main arguments which the Communist writer used was to
scorn the evidence put forward by Krivitsky that Russia was seeking a pact with
Germany. Well, time marches on, and 1 have no doubt that this writer has forgotten
about this and has now joined the new propaganda cry since the Pact did take place.
Without mentioning International Finance, this series of articles is the most
condemnatory to ever appear on the subject of Russian foreign policy and the events
have proved them correct.
Should the present European war continue, it seems
probable that the weakening of Germany will lead to the establishment of Russian
Communism there, while in the Far East exactly the same trend is noticeable in
connection with China, as we will see later. In the meantime, British Democracy
will be considerably weakened, either by the direct effects of the war or by internal
On the other side of the Atlantic, in America, the International
Group has also moved to advantage, and is in a position to dominate the war if
it continues, while obtaining a further stranglehold on the entire British Empire.
Bertrand Russell Speaks
at Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A., Easter 1939, Mr. Bertrand Russell was reported as
having said that a world war would start during 1939, from which America and Russia
would emerge as dictators of the world. He added that the conflict would reduce
Germany, Italy, France and England to ruins. He also declared that there was only
one way by which war could be prevented, and that was by America threatening to
fight any aggressor in Europe. In Mr. Russell's opinion, that threat would never
Those who have studied the intrigues of the International Financial
Group and their domination of the administration of America, never expected them
to do any more than arm and finance both sides, with a view to world domination.
The true aim of America's bank-controlled policy was stated by a leading political
spokesman of the financial oligarchy, Senator Key Pittman, in March, 1938. He
said: "It is to our interest to maintain a substantial balance of power in
America and Russia
the outbreak of the present war, the first step by the International Group in
America was to bring pressure to bear for the removal of the arms embargo. Considering
the fact that the Jewish Brain Trust which advises President Roosevelt is the
direct mouthpiece of the financiers, there was very little difficulty in this
first move. No less a person than Mr. Walter Lippman described President Roosevelt's
real position when he wrote in the New York Herald Tribune on June 27,
1932: "It is evident that Roosevelt is not the leader of the forces behind
him. He is being used."
Although many plausible arguments were used in
connection with the debate for the repeal of the arms embargo, certain facts did
not receive very much publicity. Senator G.P. Nye, speaking on the matter, said:
"This would not prevent an American ship landing arms in Belgium for
trans-shipment to French armies, or German armies, for that matter." And
while America remains "neutral" she will also be able to ship war materials
to Russia, who will, in turn, be able to ship them to Germany.
As a matter
of fact America has been the greatest contributor to the building up of Russia's
huge industrial machine, and there are already indications that American materials
are going into Germany, via Russia.
More and more evidence is being brought
to light, all indicating the close similarity of the policies of America and Russia.
Even Mr. H.G. Wells, who is a Socialist, remarked back in 1934, about "an
ideological connection between Washington and Moscow." Apart from the evidence
which I have already brought forward, a further brief study of Russo- American
history will prove of great interest, and clearly reveal the real enemies of civilization.
Mr. Schiff Dictates American Policy
people look upon the U.S.A. as one of the great bulwarks of democratic government
and the rights of the individual. We hear many eulogies about the American Constitution
and the "rugged individualism" of the people. This view is far from
being correct. The following will show beyond all reasonable doubt that even the
presidents of America are mere puppets in the hands of the financial ring, and
that any President who has the audacity to oppose the will of the financiers is
likely to feel their tremendous power.
The evidence that Schiff and his group
have played a subtle but important part in the affairs of Russia since they first
financed Japan in the Russo-Japanese conflict, back in 1904- 5 (which I will deal
with later) is monumental. Detailed evidence of this has already been brought
Revolutionary activities of a terrorist nature were constantly taking
place during and after the Russo-Japanese war, and were financed by Schiff, through
Russia accepted the mediation of America in connection with this reign
of terror and Count Witte was the Russian representative. Now, as Count Witte
had married a Jewess, he could hardly be termed anti-Semitic. Jacob Schiff attended
in person with the official American representative at this conference of mediation,
and made it quite clear that the cause of the internal trouble in Russia was the
status of his fellow-Jews. Count Witte tried to point out that most of the reports
about the treatment of Jews in Russia were rather exaggerated; whereupon Schiff
said: "If the Czar will not accord our people these desired liberties, then
a revolution will bring about a Republic which will assure us our rights."
The evidence for the above matter was made public in Count Witte's "Memoirs,"
(Berlin, 1932; Vol. 1, pp. 394-5).
Schiff apparently started to carry his
threat into operation, and an intensification of terrorist activities in Russia,
mainly by Jewish Nihilists, took place. Furthermore, many of these Russian Jews
obtained the protection of the United States by paying a trip to that country,
becoming nationalised and then returning to Russia as American citizens. The Russian
Government next decided that Russian Jews, whether they had obtained American
nationality or not, were to be subject to deportation, while a number were refused
entrance in spite of American passports.
Mr. Schiff in America immediately
took action and called upon the President of America at that time, Mr. William
H. Taft, and demanded that, as an act of reprisal, the American Government should
break off trade relations with Russia. Mr. Taft was one of the very few Presidents
who had not had the support of the big banking houses in his election campaign,
and naturally refused to do what Schiff ordered. On leaving Taft, Schiff was furious,
and said: "Now it is war."
What happened next can be best described
by none other than M. Francois Coty, the millionaire perfume manufacturer of Paris,
who mysteriously died in 1934 after a long campaign exposing International Financiers.
He wrote: "It was war indeed. From the next day every Jewish newspaper in
the States, as well as the big dailies, subventioned by Kuhn, Loeb and Co., started
their attack on Taft, in accusing him of 'having allowed an Oriental Despot to
American citizens.' Committees were formed, public meetings were
held, and every politician who could be got at was enlisted. The Senate and the
White House were filled with motions of protest. Though short, this campaign seems
to have cost Jacob Schiff three million dollars. President Taft had not foreseen
what consequences his refusal would have for him. Ten months later, December 13,
1911, Taft gave in. The two Houses of Congress, like an orchestra to the baton
of Jacob Schiff, had just invited the President to inform Russia that the Treaty
of Commerce between the two countries was cancelled as an act of reprisal over
the Jewish passport affair. Kuhn, Loeb and Co.'s victory was complete." And
so the President of the Mighty American Republic was "brought to his knees."
I have already
dealt at length with the part played by Kuhn, Loeb and Co. in Russian affairs
during the last war. After the Revolution Schiff wrote to Milioukoff, Minister
of Foreign Affairs in Kerensky's Republican Government, as follows: "
I congratulate, through you, the Russian people upon what they have now wonderfully
God bless you." Thus the head of the most powerful Banking
House in the world welcomed the Russian Revolution.
President Wilson, who
was also under the domination of this group, lost no time in recognising the new
form of government, and sent a delegation to Russia, while a loan of 187,000,000
dollars was placed at the new regime's disposal.
The relations between the
two countries have gradually become closer until the advent of the Roosevelt Administration,
when powerful business interests and certain sections of the press "unanimously"
reached the conclusion that it was time for still closer co-operation between
the two countries. The result was that Roosevelt asked Russia to 11 send a representative
to discuss all questions concerning the two countries. Litvinoff arrived in Washington,
and ten days later diplomatic relations "were established by a change of
notes, in which each party agreed to respect the territorial integrity of the
other, not to intervene in the internal affairs of the other, and tolerate no
organisation engaged in such interference."
It is also interesting to
note that Litvinoff secured one of his greatest victories at the Economic World
Conference of 1933, at which James Warburg, from Kuhn, Loeb and Co., represented
the American interests. Litvinoff was able to negotiate an American loan for Russia,
bringing about the resumption of commercial relations with England.
A brief study of the ideas behind the New Deal
in America indicates a close similarity to the ideas being put into operation
in Russia. As a matter of fact, many quotations could be given which indicate
that socialist writers themselves regard the principles of the New Deal as being
derived from socialism. Possibly the most significant thing is the manner in which
the administration of America, like Russia, has gradually come under the control
of influential Jews who are in contact with Jewish International Finance. It has
been estimated that well over 90 per cent. of the administrative posts in Russia
are filled by Jews who entered Russia just prior to and during the Revolution.
As Douglas Reed puts it in his book, "Insanity Fair": "I asked
myself where were the Russians?"
Someone might well ask, "Where
are the Americans?" The dominating figures in the Roosevelt Administration
are Bernard Baruch and Professor Frankfurter. These two men have been responsible
for a policy which is Bolshevising the whole of American industry. Production
is being dominated by Government control, while bureaucracy is flourishing everywhere.
Individualism is being ruthlessly stamped out. Production is actually being destroyed
in harmony with this policy of New Dealism.
Baruch is recognised in well-informed
circles as the contact between the financiers and Roosevelt. At a Senate official
inquiry he said: "l suppose I was the most powerful man in the United States
of America during the war."
The power which Baruch wields today is summed
up in a statement which appeared in the Brooklyn Jewish Examiner: "One of
the key Roosevelt advisors is Bernard M. Baruch, a power in the Wilson administration.
In the absence of the Secretary of State, Hull, and the President from Washington,
Mr. Baruch we regard as unofficial President. Professor Frankfurter, who has declined
a number of important positions in the Roosevelt Administration, has, nevertheless,
had his recommendations accepted in filling half a dozen of the most important
legal posts in the Government, and continues to function as one of the President's
most trustworthy advisers."
as a Second Kerensky?
On present indications, the International group
are pushing America well along the road to complete bolshevisation. That the present
war will be used to further the grip is most likely. Possibly, the most amazing
disclosure on record of the real aims of the Jewish New Dealers was made by a
Dr. Wirt in 1934, when he stated before a Congressional Committee that the object
of the Brain Trust was the overthrow of the whole existing order. Dr. Wirt said
that he had attended a dinner party near Washington, at which the guests were
mainly disciples of Professor Tugwell and Mr. Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture,
and being employed in different departments of the New Deal. He stated that:
Brain Trusters said in his presence that they planned to destroy the present form
of government; "
(2) By thwarting recovery they could promote economic
changes that would convince the people that the central Government should take
(3) By having the people borrow from the Government, Uncle
Sam would later have to assume control of business and property when payments
could not be met; "
(4) A statement had been made to him by Brain Trusters
that 'we all think he is only the Kerensky of this revolution and can be supplanted
by a Stalin';
"(5) The power of influencing the people by propaganda
is being used as a science, as in the war days;
"(6) The press would
have to 'beg for mercy' by threats of censorship;
"(7) The Government
loans were to be used for the purpose of keeping schools and colleges 'in line';
"(8) Money given to farmers as 'doles' would keep them quiet until the
job could be finished."
Needless to say, these charges had a sensational
effect, and every effort was made to discredit Dr. Wirt. However, the course of
events has proved his allegations partially correct. Whether America can be brought
completely to her knees by the same group responsible, for the Russian Revolution
is a matter which will, no doubt, be decided in the near future. The situation
is alarming. America, ruthlessly controlled by the Wall Street International Group,
with Russia in more or less political and economic vassalage, dominates the international
situation today. They will supply both the Allies and Germany with raw materials,
and allow them to become exhausted in a devastating struggle. Only action based
on correct knowledge of the aim of Finance can possibly prevent the threatened
breakdown of "European" civilization.
of the Last War
A close study of the vast amount of authoritative
literature dealing with the factors and events which led up to the last war has
been responsible for the widely-held belief in well informed circles that the
real objectives of the last war-as desired by International Finance-were the Russian
Revolution, the formation of a League of Nations, and the financial and political
subjugation of Great Britain.
No greater error can be made than to regard
the present conflict as a mere military conflict. International Finance is now
moving into position for one desperate attempt to consolidate the results of the
last war and achieve complete world domination. The tremendous military machine
in Russia today is the armed force of International Finance.
Plan of Attack
I have so far dealt with methods by which the last
war was prolonged. The first move by High Finance towards the World State through
the establishment of a vast bureaucracy in Russia, and the first step in the smashing
up of the British Empire-or to be more correct, the smashing up of British institutions.
The following statement by Mr. L.D. Byrne, Technical Adviser to the Alberta
Government, and one of the most astute economic and political minds in the world
today, sums up the situation in a brilliant and graphic analysis:
the operation of their disastrous financial system led to widespread economic
distress and growing social discontent, International Finance has been manoeuvring
the situation for a final bid for world domination. Great Britain and France were
jockeyed into a position in which it became increasingly certain that they would
be embroiled in war with Germany and Italy. The necessary financial assistance
to ensure that all nations were well armed was forthcoming, thereby ensuring that
the combatants would inflict the maximum damage on each other. In passing, it
should be noted that throughout the preceding post-war year of economic distress
no such financial assistance was made available to relieve the economic plight
of the people in those countries.
"To any one who has followed the situation
closely, it would appear that the broad plan of campaign of the Money Power is
to engage Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy in a way which will wreck those
countries. This would leave intact the forces of Russia-i.e. of International
Finance- masters of Europe. At the appropriate moment, through their control of
the entire economic structure of the United States, and because of the economic
conditions developing there, the Money Power will be able to collapse the economy
of that country and precipitate revolution. By the same tactics as they have already
adopted in Russia and elsewhere, it would seem that International Finance hopes
to create a situation in which it will be able to seize power and establish a
dictatorship in the U.S.A. This might be done through the establishment of a Soviet
Union of American Republics or some similar social system. Thus the Money Power
is moving to gain within a comparatively short time its objective of world domination
and to destroy the British Commonwealth of Nations."
It can be taken as axiomatic that very few men obtain power
under present economic and financial conditions unless those groups who control
finance are so disposed. Hitler was certainly no exception to the rule. The evidence
that the International Group in Wall Street, with the aid of the Bank of England,
was desirous of building a strong and highly centralised Germany is very considerable.
Apart from this evidence, the following statement by Dr. Schacht upon the resignation
of Hindenburg in favour of Hitler is particularly significant: "For three
months we shall have to do what Hitler tells us. After that, he will have to do
what we tell him."
Hitler seemed to have other ideas, and, although the
reign of tyranny which the Hitler Administration was responsible for was, no doubt,
acceptable to the financiers as the first step towards preparing Germany to fit
into the World Police- State, a serious position arose when Hitler severed contact
with International Finance, dismissed Schacht and removed the Jewish control of
the nation. From then on it started to become obvious that war was the next step.
No doubt, the International Financiers were convinced that Hitler had served his
purpose in preparing Germany for complete bolshevisation, and now had to be removed.
what tactics were used to force Hitler's hand may never be known, except to the
historian of the future. However, one feature of the general position is more
than significant. As L. D. Byrne points out, although Hitler had no difficulty
in obtaining raw materials for war purposes-practically all controlled by International
Finance-various methods were used to throw up trade barriers against consumable
goods for the German people. For example, Roosevelt controlled, as we have seen,
by the financial oligarchy, early in 1939, imposed a 25 per cent duty on all German
goods coming to America. This was done while on the other hand he was asking a
peace gesture of Germany! This embargo meant that Germany was less able to obtain
foreign credits for raw materials.
This and other steps by the financiers
created the ideal environment to force a dictator of the Hitler mentality into
a European war. Great Britain and France were jockeyed into position by the same
powers, and, as mentioned, one of the main objectives of the present conflict
is to first destroy British democracy and establish a system similar to that operating
How Britain is Being Bolshevised
With all its defects, the "Anglo-Saxon character" and all
that it stands for is, possibly, the greatest bulwark against tyranny in the world
today. Finance realises this, with the result that Britain is today fighting for
her very existence. The real enemy is not Hitler and Germany, but the powers which
control Britain, and which are working for the complete bolshevisation of the
nation. The war has been used to bring down "emergency" powers as the
first step. Since then we have also seen the following steps:
national service, added to the conscription of youth, which means the cessation
of innumerable privately earned incomes. The entire nation will yet be on Government
pay, with all individual money-power gone.
(2) Tremendous increase in taxation
which is smashing up all the privately-owned estates and bringing them under the
control of the Government-i.e., the banks. It is interesting to note that this
move has the sanction of most Labour supporters, with their mania for higher taxation.
This is bolshevisation with a vengeance, as the entire means of production will
pass to the control of the financial oligarchy who control the Government.
3) The breaking up of the British home by compulsory separation of mothers from
children and husbands from wives in the evacuation areas. The Russian term for
this is "communisation."
Possibly one of the most deplorable statements
in connection with this last move was made by Lady Astor, M.P., who is reported
as saying: "The whole future of our children is going to be changed by this
great experiment. We shall find that the child of two to five is better off without
the mother, if that mother is untrained or too busy to give it the time it needs."
Lady Astor believes the mother "is necessary only during the first year.
The child of two to five must have discipline and proper care."
recalls the statement of a Bolshevik writer in a pamphlet on the objectives of
Bolshevism: "To remove children as much as possible from the influence of
parents and family life, it is extremely desirable that special children's towns
should be established."
Just how much the British people will endure
of this sort of thing, even if it is advocated by Lady Astor and others of her
ilk, is a moot point. However, the general trends are alarming.
On top of
this the war situation has been used to advantage for furthering the idea of Political
and Economic Planning (P.E.P. ), which I have already briefly referred to earlier
in this story of International Finance. We have seen how the Bank of England,
back in 1931, was interested in this project. As a matter of fact, the first chairman
of P.E.P. was Sir Basil Blackett, a Director of the Bank of England. Apparently,
Sir Basil Blackett's ideas of running this planning campaign were too open for
those who wanted more subtle tactics, with the result that he was forced to resign.
The new Chairman was Mr. Israel Moses Sieff, head of Marks and Spencer, the great
chain-store concern. Since then a policy of "infiltration" has been
pursued, with the result that "planning is in air." Even "respectable"
circles discuss the merits of "planning." Of course, people in these
circles would be insulted if you told them that they are moving parallel to the
Communists and their policy.
One of the most damning statements on the progress
that the planners are now making appeared in a recent issue of an English church-magazine.
following extract will indicate what is happening, and what is likely to happen:
"The Political and Economic Planning group, under the chairmanship of Mr.
Sieff, is out to reduce every public and private activity in England to a compact
mechanism of State-aided monopolies, combines, and chain-stores, under the control
of a few financiers . . .
This wonderful and genial movement for the enslavement
of Great Britain is making fair headway, and has succeeded in laying hands on
pigs, bacon, milk, potatoes, turnips, buses . .
The latest to join the movement
is the National Birth Control Association, which has, accordingly, altered its
name to Family Planning Association. It will tell when and whom to marry, how
many children to bring into the world, when to divorce, when and how to die, all
according to the lofty standards of a group of financiers' financial needs and
The outcome is hard to foresee at the moment. If the British
people and their institutions are to survive, the present onslaught on every worth-while
tradition will need to be resisted immediately. The present makes the situation
doubly hard. The only contribution that Australia can make to the fight to save
civilization is to attack the financial problem internally and expose similar
moves which are being carefully prepared to completely enslave this nation as
well. There is every reason to believe that, because of our geographical position,
we will possibly play a decisive part in the tremendous struggle which will certainly
be decided, one way or the other, within a comparatively short period.
Control of the World's News
Any discussion on International Finance,
without a brief mention of the manner in which the news channels of the world
are also controlled or influenced by the financiers, would be incomplete. During
the last war, Sir Cecil Spring Rice, British Ambassador to America, whom we have
already mentioned, wrote:
"One by one the Jews are capturing the principal
newspapers . . . and the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. is active in everything
of interest to Germany." In his book, From Pharoah to Hitler," Bernard
J. Brown a Jewish lawyer of Chicago, states: "Jews have muzzled the non-Jew
press." In view of the Jewish influence in International Finance, this last
quotation takes on a sinister meaning. Henry Ford, in his clash with Jewish International
Finance, just after the war, learnt the tremendous power of a controlled press,
and has been strangely silent on this question ever since. The London Times, influential
paper in connection with British financial policy, is now owned by the Astor family.
Major Astor is a director of the great Jewish Bank of Hambros, while the Hon.
H. R. Brand, who is another director, is managing director of the Jewish Bank
of Lazard Bros., which was one of the international banking houses mentioned in
the financing of the Soviet.
Possibly the most illuminating statement concerning
the connection between International Finance and the control of the main channels
of news was made in 1935 by Mr. C. Fleetwood-May, a chief official of Reuter's,
when he lectured to the Post Office Telephone and Telegraph Society at the Institute
of Electrical Engineers, London. He said: "The fact of being the world's
news-centre means a great deal. London could hardly have become the financial
hub of the world if it was not also the news-centre. News collected on an internationally-organised
scale was originally nothing to do with newspapers but started as an essential
part of International Finance. It began with Fuggers, financiers, who had correspondents
all over Europe."
Needless to say, the direct control of the entire press
of the world is not exclusive to International Finance. Still, the ramifications
are tremendous, and the sooner people realise this, the sooner they will start
to understand that the flood of ideas concerning planning, world Governments,
etc., which have been, and are being, carefully fostered from many quarters, has
one end in view: Intense centralisation everywhere, as the prelude to world domination.
China to be Sovietized?
the time of writing there is very little more to be said in connection with the
general position in Europe. Broadly speaking, International Finance is moving
to plan, and the future of Western civilisation depends upon just how fast, and
in what circles, the facts which we have already dealt with can be made to permeate.
The next twelve months will certainly be decisive. However, there is one aspect
of international Finance's activities which we have not yet touched upon. I refer
to the position in the East. China, like Russia, offers wonderful scope for development
and industrialisation, and it was more than significant that, as soon as the present
conflict broke out, Russia intensified activities in that country. It can be taken
as certain that International Finance, with the aid of Russia, is determined also
to "bolshevise" China. This viewpoint has been held in many well-informed
circles for some time.
Therefore, it was not surprising to see the following
report in the Melbourne Herald of Tuesday, November 21, 1939: "The
Soviet envoy, at a recent interview with the President of the Chinese Executive
Council, made six demands, including: Guarantees of Communist administration in
frontier regions; allocation of areas for Communist army garrisons; suppression
of anti-Communist speeches and greater freedom for Communist propaganda."
Also, in the same issue of the Herald, the following appeared: "Probably
Chiang Kai-Shek's most important ally in his long struggle is the indirect aid
given him by American resistance to Japan." It is remarkable the manner in
which Russian and American "interests" always coincide.
report, also appearing in the same edition of the Herald is worth noting:
"It is understood that Mr. T.V. Soong, financial adviser to General Chiang,
will remain in Chungking in future to control monetary affairs."
Soong has played a very important part in the financial domination of China, and
has been very closely associated with the Wall St. group. In passing, it is also
of interest to note that one of his daughters is married to Chiang Kai-Shek.
The relationship of the International Group to the situation
in the East is not very well known. The following brief description of the activities
of the financiers in these two countries will prove of interest. This description
is based on the biography of Jacob Schiff, whom we are already familiar with in
this story of International Finance. This biography was written by Dr. Cyrus Adler,
in collaboration with Mortimer Schiff, and published in 1929.
first, we find that he was "attracted by the new spirit of Japan." Why?
Because it was essentially docile, uncritical and malleable. Mr. Schiff said:
"The impression I have formed of the people is that they are possessed of
great intelligence, industry, and modesty. The Government appears to be perfectly
organised, to be proceeding conscientiously in all departments, and not to be
greatly influenced by public opinion." (My emphasis) [No emphasis in
Under the heading of "Schiff," the following appears in the
Jewish Encyclopaedia: "Kuhn, Loeb and Co. subscribed for and floated the
large war loans in 1904 and 1905, in recognition of which the Mikado conferred
on Schiff the Second Order of the Treasure of Japan."
The answer to the
question of why Mr. Schiff should engage in the rather risky business of lending
to a distant Government was supplied by His Excellency, Korekivo Takahashi, at
that time vice-president of the Bank of Japan, Financial Commissioner of the Japanese
Government of London and New York, later president of the Yokohama Specie Bank.
said: "Mr. Schiff's move to throw in his lot with Japan was taken before
her first decisive victory (at the battle of Yatu). Schiff had a grudge against
Russia because of his race (as we have already seen). He was justly indignant
at the unfair treatment of the Jewish population (in Russia)
and for this
it was deemed fit to admonish the ruling class of Russia by an object lesson.
Mr. Schiff saw in the war a welcome opportunity to give effect to his cherished
idea, and he decided to exercise whatever influence he had for playing the might
of American resources on the side of Japan. Schiff continued to be unfailing in
meeting the needs of the Japanese Government in respect of the sinews of war."
Schiff and Ernest Cassel (we have also dealt with the latter earlier) floated
the first two Imperial Japanese Government War Loans of 10 and 12 million pounds
respectively, but a new feature arose during the flotation of the third loan.
To quote Takahashi, " . . . the opening of a channel for receiving subscriptions
in Germany . . . the means of distributing our bonds in Germany was arranged through
the connection of Mr. Schiff with Messrs. M. M. Warburg, of Hamburg (note: the
head of this firm was Max Warburg, brother of Felix and Paul, who were both directors
of Kuhn, Loeb and Co.), who acted as agents of the issuing banks."
the time of the of the fourth loan, the Japanese statesmen found the British participants
rather hesitant, but Schiff "definitely assented to the view of the Japanese
Government. He thought it desirable that the German interests should be included
. . . the German group consisted of the Deutsch- Asiatische Bank, with whom eleven
leading banks were connected, and Messrs. M. M. Warburg of Hamburg. The Russian
Government must have been influenced by the announcement."
of the war firmly established the New York Group in Japan, where they were in
complete control until about 1930. Since then there is some reason to believe
that they have been forcefully removed. I will deal with this later, after reviewing
the situation in China.
China Rather Difficult
As early as 1892, Jacob Schiff was in communication with Americans
in China concerning the possibilities of loans to the Chinese Government. At the
time of Sino-Japanese war one of the leading American diplomats, John W. Forster,
approached Kuhn, Loeb and Co. for a Chinese Government loan of 1,000,000 pounds,
while the following year Schiff had succeeded in interesting Sir Ernest Cassel
in Chinese railway financing. However, the financiers found China a very different
proposition to Japan. In 1900 the Boxer Rebellion broke out, and was the first
of anti-foreign demonstrations. Schiff wrote to Max Warburg, who, as we have seen,
was financial advisor to the German Government during the Great War, and said:
"I am sorry that China is giving you so much trouble. Goodness knows, there
is enough space and there are enough people in the Chinese Empire to require different
kinds of financing for years to come."
In February, 1901, Schiff also
wrote to the American General Wilson in China: "To obtain the large loan
China will have to raise in order to enable her to pay the indemnity which is
to be demanded from her by the Powers, an entirely new system of taxation will
have to be created . . . and the revenue from this must be made sufficient for
the Government's internal needs . . . as well as for its enlarged indebtedness."
"To create such a revenue will take time, and its management will probably
have to be placed under the control of a mixed commission of representatives of
the Powers. In such an arrangement our Government can and should take a leading
In 1913 the first international consortium was set up, an event
which led directly to the downfall of the Manchu Dynasty and the entrance of China
into the World War, at the invitation of U.S.A.
After the war the old "spheres
of influence" were abolished by international agreement. The agreement constituting
the new consortium was signed on October 15, 1920.
The result of this agreement
meant that in actual fact China has become a preserve for American High Finance.
For many years after the war Kuhn, Loeb and Co. used Japan to "modernise"
China. The introduction of Communism via Moscow took place, while the establishment
of a Central Bank was also accomplished.
Around about 1930 came the first
sign of a Japanese break with Kuhn, Loeb and Co. Japanese students were sent overseas
to study economics when the World Depression broke, and sufficient evidence can
be amassed to prove that Japanese financial policy was drastically altered. The
success of this policy was shown by the fact that Japan rapidly started to capture
the world's markets, until Finance took a hand and raised almost insuperable tariff
barriers. Australia was not without blame, also fitting in with the orders of
the International Financiers. Japan was virtually forced into China, in order
to obtain raw materials and markets, which meant a clash with the International
Group. In 1936 the last semblance of Japanese contact with American Finance was
broken when the "International Clique" were "bumped off" in
Japan. At least, this viewpoint is held by many reliable students of the subject.
Since then it has been obvious that a big move has been taking place in China
by the International Financiers, who appear to be keen on pushing Japan out. Communism
is making big progress, while recent reports indicate that millions of dollars
are being spent to obtain control of the entire country. In other words, we are
likely to see the complete Sovietisation of China, and the exploitation of one
of the richest countries yet to be entirely industrialized. The parallel action
of Communism and High Finance is more than significant.
However, it can be
regarded as certain that the Chinese are not likely to succumb without a struggle
to either the Internationalists, or the Japanese. They are imbued with a hatred
of "internationalism," and we here in Australia would do well to take
the same attitude.
Throughout this story of International Finance, I have
continually stressed the point that the only contribution Australia can make in
the life-and-death drama which is being fought out all over the world against
the insidious influence of Finance is to make democracy-both politically and economically-a
reality in this country. As yet we still possess the machinery of Parliamentary
democracy, and it can be made to function just so soon as we decide to make it
do so. Nothing less than a determined effort by the individual electors of this
nation can save us from the centralised control towards which finance is rapidly
working. Centralisation of finance and administration is being fostered from many
apparently different quarters, and the ultimate aim is to bring this country under
the complete domination of an International Government controlled by International
Before dealing with the various moves towards further centralisation
in this country, it will be of interest to briefly examine the control of financial
policy exercised by International Finance. I have already intimated that the Commonwealth
Bank is in direct contact with the Bank of England, and receives advice once every
fortnight. This was not always so, as we will see presently. The lesson we learnt
in the 1929-33 depression should have removed any doubts on this matter. In 1929
the international group in New York launched their second attack on the British
Empire. The first had been launched, as we have seen, just after the war.
York's policy was dictated to the Bank of England, which, in turn, was responsible
for sending representatives to this and other British countries for the purpose
of telling us what we were expected to do. There should be no need for me to deal
with the terrible results of that murderous financial policy; a policy which forced
thousands of our people to take their lives in despair, ruined thousands of primary
producers, put tens of thousands of Australian workmen on the dole, caused the
birth rate to drop alarmingly, and, generally speaking, forced the nation to its
very knees. This is the same policy which has been responsible for such national
tragedies as the tremendous increase in malnutrition amongst our children (another
polite word for semi-starvation), slum areas, which tell a tragic story of thousands
of people facing nothing but a hopeless future, and a wave of juvenile crime such
as this country had never seen.
No words of mine can describe the terrible
treatment which this and other nations have had meted out to them by the international
financiers. Our eyes are being continually directed by a financially-controlled
press to the atrocities in Central Europe. But, charity begins at home. After
all, the refugees in Britain and Australia don't have their atrocities written
up in the press and dramatised on the radio. But read such books as Hungry England,
by Fenner Brockway, and the tears will come to your eyes. Millions of British
families, facing an utterly forlorn future, because their very lives are controlled
by International Finance. Suffering such as the world had never seen. But, as
I say, it is never dramatised; and the same here in Australia. The attack of finance
has been more ruthless than all the Hitlers in the world can ever be. We at least
see and recognise our enemy in a military conflict. As yet there are thousands
of people in this country who do not recognise their financial enemies-in fact,
they laugh when you mention it.
Apart from the financial control of Australia,
through the Commonwealth Bank, since that institution came under the dominance
of private finance, there is also a very close connection, as I have mentioned
earlier, between the Overseas Group in this country-the Bank of Australasia, the
E. S. and A. Bank, and the Union Bank-and the Bank of England. Readers of the
New Times will, no doubt, be interested to know that Mr. Goschen, whom
we have also dealt with, besides being a director of the Bank of England, is also
a director of the Bank of Australasia. He belongs to a family which has direct
representatives in the following financial institutions: Westminster Bank, Ottoman
Bank, Atlas Assurance Company, Chartered Bank of India and China, National Provincial
Bank, Mexican Railway Company, London Assurance Company, and the Provincial Bank
The sooner the Australian people sever connections with Mr. Goschen
and all his international kith and kin, the sooner we shall start to really do
something to bring about a saner state of affairs in this country.
Real Menace to Australia
Now that the international conflict has started,
Australia, like other British countries, is being prepared to fit in with the
ideas of the financiers. Already the Commonwealth Government has betrayed the
Australian people by placing them still further in pawn to the private financiers.
While the cream of the nation is expected to die on the field of battle, the bankers
will further tighten their death grip on the nation. Taxation will reach staggering
proportions, and the entire economic structure of the nation will be smashed and
individualism destroyed. This will be no figment of the imagination, unless the
present policy is reversed very quickly; if, instead of pathetically talking about
international Governments we do not start to make our own national Government
really do something.
Centralisation is being carefully fostered, and a most
alarming move in this direction, is the proposal to abolish State Parliaments.
This will remove representative Government still further from the people, and
will place all authority in a central Government, which, in turn, will be dominated
by finance. The move to abolish State Parliaments should be resisted by all democrats
and those who are interested in the preserving of democratic institutions.
from these alarming moves, we are also seeing the first steps being taken to bolshevize
Australia. It is called Sovietism in Russia, New Dealism in America, and Planning
in Britain. The first step in this country is the establishment of various boards,
which will gradually bring primary production under the control of the State.
Slowly, but surely, the primary producers, as a result of a Social Debt-policy,
are coming more and more under the control of Finance.
Before long these boards
will be telling them how much to grow and how to grow it. Individual ownership
and all that it stands for will be wiped out. At this juncture it might he appropriate
if I answer a question which, I am, sure, many readers have been asking.
refer to the apparent contradiction between Finance and what we might loosely
call Communism. I have already shown beyond all reasonable doubt that revolution
and International Finance have been closely connected. Apart from the obvious
fact that the socialisation of a country is suitable to private finance, as it
brings the entire community under a centralised Government control, which, in
turn, can be controlled by finance, I think that an extract from a book by a former
French Ambassador will completely and authoritatively answer the above question.
An Amazing Admission
of the book is "Geneva versus Peace," and the author is Comte de Saint
Aulaire. Easily one of the most astounding stories of the inside intrigues of
International Finance, it is, unfortunately, scarcely known in this country. The
author was present at a dinner of international authorities just after the last
war. A former Jewish revolutionary from Hungary, who had become a director of
a great New York bank-one of those which were responsible for financing the Russian
Revolution-was also present, and, in the course of conversation, he was asked
how it was possible that High Finance wished to foster Bolshevism. His answer,
as given by Comte de Saint Aulaire, is little short of amazing, and indicates
beyond all reasonable doubt that the real enemies of civilisation are International
Finance and Bolshevism. It also explains why all the Left-Wing groups are so unrelenting
in their hostility towards financial reform. This bank director said: "Too
much salt corrodes meat, too little lets it rot. The precept can with justice
be applied both to the human mind and to the peoples of the earth. We, Jews, apply
it wisely, as it should be applied, salt being the emblem of wisdom. We mingle
it discreetly with the bread that men consume. We administer it in corrosive doses
only in exceptional cases, as in the case of Czarist Russia. That gives you a
partial explanation why Bolshevism finds favour in our eyes: it is an admirable
salting tub in which to corrode and destroy and not to preserve
say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred
to us. It is precisely for the reason that they are direct opposites to one another,
that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its
axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity
in the International. These opposites which are at the antipodes to one another
in society and in their doctrines, meet again in the identity of their purpose
and end, the remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from
below by revolution
Russia is the sick man of post-war times, much more
nutritive to us than the Ottoman Empire and much less able to defend itself. Russia
is our new feast. It will soon be a corpse and our only trouble will be to carve
This director and his friends have been, apparently, very successful
in carving Russia up, and the same fate is the future of every other country which
refuses to recognise the enemy in time.
Task Confronting Us
The immediate task confronting this nation is
to take effective control of financial policy. This means, first and foremost,
the cultivation of a genuine Australian outlook, as opposed to an international
outlook, which weakens national sovereignty and paves the way for further attack
by the international financiers. If we are to survive as a democracy, government
must be brought closer to the people. As mentioned, the present war is more than
a merely military conflict. It is a fundamental conflict between two ideologies.
It is the climax of an issue which has been brought down the ages: Is the individual
more important than the State? Those who believe in the Christian tenets, such
as embodied in the statement, "The Sabbath was made for man and not man for
the Sabbath," must stand firm against all forms of tyranny. Apart from this,
there is also the cultural aspect, which, I feel, has been entirely overlooked
by many people. From a cultural viewpoint, there is very little in common between
the Russian social and cultural outlook and that of Western Europe. Should Western
Europe go down before a wave of Bolshevism, as appears extremely likely, unless
the real enemies are recognised in time, the entire fate of British institutions
and cultural traditions will largely depend upon the effort made here in Australia.
Geographically, we are very fortunately placed. As far as raw materials are concerned,
we have, possibly, the greatest undeveloped white man's country in the whole world.
We could even contribute something of value to the world of culture without the
aid of Hollywood's Jewish influence. All that is wanted is a supreme effort to
face the issue fairly and squarely. Nothing can alter the fact that the British
Empire, in every sense of the term, is today fighting for its very existence.
We Have Done It Once
expressed the viewpoint that the international group are too firmly entrenched
to defeat. Well, in 1920-21, it was Australia that showed the world that International
Finance can be beaten. While every other country was going through the first post-war
depression Australia was enjoying comparative prosperity. Why? Because at that
time we had a few real Australian leaders, such as Sir Dennison Miller, who, by
the use of the Commonwealth Bank, were able to thwart the plans of the private
financiers. Although the Bank has been hamstrung since 1924, when the Bruce-Page
Administration betrayed the Australian people, the fact remains that just so soon
as we demand that the Bank be used to finance the nation's requirements, without
further debt or taxation, it can be done. The method of carrying through such
a campaign to obtain this policy has already been applied. The defeat of the National
Insurance scheme, by the new technique of pressure-politics, as opposed to party
politics showed the Australian people once and for all that democracy can and
will work if the individual electors will only accept their responsibilities.
Thousands upon thousands of demand-letters, in possibly the greatest wave of public
opinion this country has ever seen, showed that the power of finance can be beaten.
Let us do it again!
we stand at the crossroads
The picture which I have tried to outline-and
briefly, at that-is not nice to contemplate, but the time has long passed for
clouding the issue. We have got to face the fact that the present situation calls
for a high degree of courage, and a burning belief in the cause for which we are
fighting. To say that it is a case of life and death is understating the case.
Every person who knows the position has a great responsibility. No excuse can
relieve those individuals from throwing their whole weight in the balance of civilisation.
We have two enemies: The financiers on one hand, and the Left-Wing groups on the
other. The financiers are our conscious enemies. The Left-Wing groups our unconscious
enemies. Should we be successful in wresting financial policy from the control
of private financiers, and sweeping them from power once and for all, Australia
can preserve civilisation and culture as we understand it, and offer a hand of
hospitality to those who may seek to escape the possible break-up of civilisation
in Western Europe. Whether we are destined to become great in this sense or not,
time alone will prove. But we have a great heritage and a great future if we will
only fight to win. Possibly, as one writer has put it, Australia may become the
New Britannia in a New World. Surely this is worth striving for; or will we, like
other civilisations before, suddenly collapse into chaos, with no future, no hope,
and jungle law? Each reader must make his own choice. It is a fight to the death
between International Finance and the individual. If civilisation is to survive
the individual must win.
[Note: Some of the
publications cited in this essay may be obtained on the Internet from AbeBooks,