I am always on guard when the government starts talking about how well off people on welfare are. (The Australian, October 28, 2016, p. 1) Hence the shock! horror! that a single parent with four children could receive around $50,000, equivalent to someone earning $65,000 a year. The Liberals and the capitalist elite class are in horror of people getting money and not “working” and the Liberals are busy, busy, busy at work overhauling welfare, so I presume the single parent with four kids will have to work in the salt mines.

Never mind that there is no work out there. Or that it will be damn difficult for any parent with four children to work. So what do the Libtards want: let the kids be neglected, turn to crime and cost society even more? It is the typical attitude of an economically-obsessed political class who have lost any basic concern for social cohesion and sustainability. The feminists should be hammering them on this one, but as we saw with the Gillard cuts, single parents don’t rate high on their list of priorities. And we haven’t even got to putting a social credit spin on all of this, that the entire “work or die” philosophy needs  to die, because it does not work.
Brian Simpson has an excellent article that takes this issue further, especially in light of the machine and computer age - the fourth industrial revolution - that opens this whole argument up to the social credit answer of a "universal dividend for all" while the machines do the work, paid from the National Credit Authority.

Alan Kohler, “The Rise of the Machines and the Next Trump, at http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/alan-kohler/the-rise-of-the-machines-and-the-next-trump/news-story/8c54b44f1e3d792930c67e29604b298e, gives a predictable response to the Trump phenomenon, but adds a twist. The short of the long is that Clinton will win, because, well, the good guy globalists always win, but beware Trump 2.0, because next time the Republicans will find a candidate who has not committed the unforgiveable sin of liking to have sex with women. Well, we will see, it’s early days yet and who knows if all this may blow away, or blow into an all-out civil war.

What I find interesting are Kohler’s remarks about the rise of robotics and IT. With technological advances robots through advanced-control algorithms, could replace not only drivers, but surgeons and even journalists. There did not appear to be a recognition that Kohler himself could be replaced by a machine in all this. And why not; surely much of the comments that we attack here each week from the mainstream press could be produced by a machine. Maybe it really is. In any case, globalisation will end because robots, no matter where they are located around the world, are simply cheaper than humans. Who needs people anymore?
So, what will people – remember them? – do for a living? One idea is a universal income, suggested by Elon Musk of Tesla, who is working on the driverless cars, which will create massive unemployment. Certainly the corporates won’t pay for this, so governments will have to.
Kohler gives no answer because the governments are already struggling with debt, and it is difficult to see how governments could do this under orthodox finance/economics.
Clearly there is no orthodox economic answer to this, so there will either be mass bloodshed or else the time for the social credit economy has arrived and the elites will fall.  This will only happen if the common man and woman work together until the pressure is irresistible and the political class yeild!

For many years I have been arguing that “foreign investment” – actually no more than selling off the “family farm” – will lead to the dispossession of Australians.
The Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce has said that Australia’s sovereignty is threatened by the sale of farmland to foreigners. (The Australian, October 27, 2016, p. 8) As well, patriotism gets undermined.

He said: “It is the essence of patriotism, the love of one’s country, (and) it is best delivered when you own that country. And there’s one thing that people are not prepared to do, and that’s to die for a rented country.”
I could not have put it better myself!  Perhaps this is the first sign of a mainstream awakening to the great sell-off of Australia that both parties have allowed, and encouraged?

Melbourne’s crime wave continues. On October 25, 2016, three men “described as being of African appearance,” robbed a Toorak jewellery store. They were armed with a machete, a hammer and a gun. (The Australian, October 26, 2016, p. 3) This article says: “Youths of African heritage are being blamed for a series of violent crimes in recent months across the city, particularly break-and-enter offences and car hijackings.” (as above) The co-owner of the jewellery shop said the police are “frustrated because similar crimes were happening regularly.”
Then there was the assassination of Hamad Assaad, a “known player among Sydney’s loose network of Middle Eastern crime gangs.” (as above) Police predict further gangland killings.

So, how did Australia end up becoming just like America? Wasn’t the 1996 banning of guns supposed to make us “safe”? Instead, the country is awash in illegal guns, in the hands of the gangs. John Howard, got anything to say on this?

This is where Donald Trump will come face-to-face with the dilemma.  He wants, understandably, to restore and promote jobs and industry for renewed domestic prosperity and security but those jobs previously endangered by foreign competition are increasingly jeopardized by the rising “spectre”” of automation and artificial intelligence and he will be forced to seek another solution—as will leaders in all the industrial nations.  The various “Guaranteed Income” schemes although long active have remained moribund primarily because they have relied on tax funding, are therefore simply not financially viable and will become increasingly less so as the base of taxable income earners shrinks.  

As Major Douglas predicted nearly a century ago would happen, civilization is now approaching the crossroads where the existing financial system is proving to be incompatible with the labour displacing role of modern technology. 
It is absolutely essential that we Social Crediters selectively and vigorously approach all organizations, movements and public policy analysts and administrators who are wrestling with this phenomenon and its consequences but until more recent times were restricted from hearing about C H. Douglas’s message.

I just received an unexpected  message from a new contact in Scotland appealing for information on the A + B Theorem to assist him in delivering a scheduled lecture to the Positive Money people.  Things are definitely beginning to “percolate”.  It is incumbent upon us Social Crediters to bring them to a “boil”.
Surely, we are approaching a new renaissance for Social Credit! 
Douglas’s analysis of the price-system has provided the key to the solution of an otherwise unsolvable problem.

According to The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/safe-schools-teaching-gender-diversity-to-sydney-uni-students/news-story/f7b6e18a03f242074983a4bb9d32dfc0) “Gender Training for Uni Students,” teaching students at the University of Sydney have taken part in the sex and gender diversity training of the Safe Schools Coalition. After great controversy, federal government funding has been pulled, so the group wants to beef up supporters as much as possible to its politically correct approach to sex “education” for children.

The Liberal Member for Epping in NSW, Damien Tudehope, said that this encroachment on universities is consistent with its “Marxist approach” to social engineering.
I would say though that the cultural Marxism found in Safe Schools originated with the universities in the first place and that student teachers have already had their dose of cultural Marxism.

With Bob Dylan (Zimmerman) getting the Nobel Prize, people have been thinking about the contributions of Beatle, John Lennon, especially what he gave the “new morality.”
A good article deconstructing Lennon from an Alt Right perspective is by Roosh, “John Lennon’s “Imagine” Programmed You to Accept the Globalism Nightmare,” Rooshv.com, October 24, 2016. As Roosh points out, this song is the most open in promoting globalism and communism:

“Imagine there’s no countries,”
“no religion, too”;
“Imagine there’s no heaven,”
“Imagine no possessions,”
“a brotherhood of man.”

Most of the “cultural war journalists" at this site had been busy working on a post-US election special which was to analyse how electoral and political corruption brought Trump down. But to our surprise and delight, a lot of this analysis is now only historically relevant given Trump’s heroic and epic victory, and of course, the triple whammy of Republicans also achieving a majority in both the US House of Representatives and the Senate.

We felt, given the utterly enormous amount of corruption within the American Establishment, that Trump could not get over the line; that it would be close, but the elites would steal the election. Although we were well aware of the Brexit effect given recent attempts to undermine it, we felt the globalists would not make the same mistake twice. And yet they did.
The opinion polls, with their sham claim of “statistical representation” based on samples of a few thousand, and the smoke and mirrors of shonky mathematics, were wrong! The arrogant chattering class were completely wrong! 

The conspirator’s conspirator, George Soros, is one busy boy, with seemingly boundless energy for someone 85, or is it 855? He seems to have been with us for an eternity.
Running through this, is no particular order, we find that many of the voting machines used in the US elections, are put out by George Soros’ companies or companies with deep ties to him. (Breitbart.com, October 27, 2016)

If the reported claim is true, that Soros said that Trump will win the popular vote in the landslide, but lose the Electoral College, I think those voting machines need to be closely looked at by Team-Trump. This indicates that there may be widespread rigging of the US polls, or at the very least, a conflict of interest.

The metaphor of “the red pill” and “blue pill” is a meme from the mesosphere movement and comes from the first Matrix (1999) movie. People can remain blind slaves to the system by feeding on the “blue pill” or they can see reality, warts and all by taking the “red pill.”
Men who champion anti-feminism and a male identity movement, with a return to the traditional “John Wayne man,” use this metaphor. Some of the younger men focused on the Don Juan “pick up artist” (PUA), aspects of “game,” to seduce women, such as the early Roosh V, but most are moving beyond this now, paying attention to the wider corruption of the system.

Bettina Arndt (The Weekend Australian, October 29-30, 2016, p. 22), discusses a feminist response to the movie The Red Pill, by feminist film-maker Cassie Jaye. She intended to expose men’s rights activists, but came to see, to her credit, that these men had been unjustifiably painted as misogynists, and had valid points to make. Thus feminists began an attack on her and a campaign to stop the film being shown. There was no “human rights” funding, always available for feminist propaganda, for a movie on men’s rights.
Here is yet another example of how our culture is “rigged” and decadent. There will be no right or free speech for anyone opposing the New World Order morality. And why expect it – it is, after all, a “cultural war?”

One of the first signs to look for will be the names and backgrounds of the folks Donald Trump will appoint in his new administration. Especially his Chief of Staff and Secretary of State. I see that the President-elect of the United States of America is showing signs of “looking to old Wall Street hands” to fill some of the jobs that will be in his power to offer.
So, when President Trump has put America back on the road to prosperity, what will he do with the production surplus that his own people cannot purchase through lack of purchasing power, and to which countries will he export the surpluses in this age of the Robotic Revolution – far surpassing the productivity, along with the globalization and ‘unemployment’, of the 20th century? 

Here is one example:  American ‘Greg’ emailed the following to Canadian Wallace Klinck:
“Wally, there was a recent radio segment about Youngstown, [Ohio, USA], Steel country where mills long ago shut down.  When a French steelmaker moved in to set up a new mill, [there was] initial rejoicing, but it needed to hire only 400 workers to do production formerly requiring 20-thousand workers.  The factories come back but not the jobs.”

The coverage of the US election by “our” national newspaper, The Australian, was little short of appalling. Journalists made little attempt to offer balance and instead engaged in outpourings of hatred against Trump, primarily because he broke the sacred convention of attacking immigration, the golden calf of the elites.
Sure, Trump said that he liked sex with women, but there was little coverage of the Bill Clinton rape saga. It was mentioned, but one would have thought that rape allegations by live subjects were more important that a ten-year-old tape of a private conversation about wanting to have sex with some woman. The imbalance and bias here is so blatant that one becomes numb by just observing it.

The Australian did not learn any lessons from Brexit, and almost moronically adopted an uncritical belief in the opinion polls, all of which were defective in various ways – proved by their utter failure to predict the election results once again.  The “silent majority” of voters just don’t reply to opinion polls, or give interviewers what they want, then vote against the elites. The chattering class did not see it, and it has hit them like a punch out of the blue.

In his article, “An Historic, Quite Possibly Revolutionary Victory!”
Kevin MacDonald  at http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/11/an-amazing-victory/#more-81356,  gives an excellent overview of the philosophical significance of the Trump victory, which he sees as “ a victory of White Americans over the oligarchic, hostile elites what have run this country for decades. Trump accomplished a hostile takeover of the Republican Party and won without the support or with only lukewarm and vacillating support from much of the GOP elite.”

He quotes from a previous article which he published in Radix Journal, on the political meaning of Trump, which illustrates how, even if Trump did not set out initially to do so, has changed politics.

Here’s another gender wage gap article: “Widening Wage Gap Blamed on Bias.” (The Australian, October 28, 2016, p. 5) The article says that “Gender discrimination is increasingly contributing to the pay gap between men and women and remains the biggest reason for the difference in their wages.”

The research for this is a report by KPMG Australia, which found that the proportion of the pay gap due to gender discrimination rose from 35 percent in 2007 to 38 percent in 2014.  So, are employers breaking any law by paying women less for the same work? No!

To THE AGE
Your editorial ('Lessons for us all in Trump's victory', 10/11) refers to political 'disenchantment' directed against 'a supposed political and wealthy ruling class'. There is nothing 'supposed' about it; a torrent of books and internet articles in recent decades have documented its existence in minute and comprehensive detail.

A major element within it happens to be Jewish, based on the financial power of great banking families, supported by intense networking of ethnically based supporters with Israel as the flagship.
Nicole Hemmer complains ('The new republic of fear', 10/11) that now 'anti-Semitism is a genuine force in American life for the first time since the 1950s'. No, it is not that but justified opposition to the influence of a minority of Jews who have caused unnecessary Middle Eastern wars to assist Israel and who, through a hoped-for Clinton presidency, were planning the destruction of free speech by major censorship of the internet.
Most Jews are not implicated in this.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

To THE AUSTRALIAN
Niki Savva is denying reality in claiming that 'nobody won this election' ('When they go low, we go high - so far, anyway', 10/11). Trump won; American conservatism won, not 'left-wing populism', as Greg Sheridan suggests; intellectual freedom won, for now we will be spared the planned Obama-Clinton censorship of the internet; the spirit of reform won, for a corrupt US badly needs that; realism on racial and ethnic matters won, for most people still identify with their own folk and the principle of 'big family' deserves respect not 'anti-racist' derision; and peace won, for Trump will disengage from Middle Eastern adventurism as he tries to rebuild his nation.

'Every decent conservative denounced Trump or separated from him,' Savva adds. Not so at all. Did she not read former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan's columns or those published by distinguished intellectual Kevin MacDonald and others in 'The Occidental Observer' or Cory Bernardi's statement?
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

Confession time; before turning to the Alt Right, I had “Leftist” sympathies of a vague sort. Actually, in the mid-1980s about (1984), my girlfriend at the time was a socialist type who was active in the protest against Professor Geoffrey Blainey.  All that was the turning point for that 20-year old science student.

Blainey had said something mild like “the pace of Asian migrant is out stripping public opinion.” Rightly, he seemed concerned mainly with the influx of poorly educated Asians who were, allegedly adding to unemployment. For any reasonable person that was a claim worthy of considered reflection. For this he was viciously attacked by the Left, including my girlfriend at the time, who at one protest threw an egg or something at him, which fortunately missed. But this was a wake-up call for me about the fanaticism of Leftism, and I immediately broke up with her and began my journey to the Right, which was the right thing to do.

The financial system, that is, the banking, cost accounting, and tax systems, can either serve the common good, or else it will serve an oligarchic elite at the expense of the common good.
The present system serves, to a greater or lesser degree, an oligarchic elite.

Ever-increasing indebtedness, the rising cost of living, heavy taxation, environmental damage and decay, lack of leisure, poverty and social unrest, physical and psychological ill-health, and incremental totalitarianism are the price we pay for running the financial system as a privately owned, self-serving monopoly.

What is Social Credit and Why Is It So Important in this fourth industrial age?