An ominous step?

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, 25 August 2005 12:56.

In 2003, with little publicity, an Australian Senate committee made a momentous decision.

With support from all parties, the committee recommended the formation of a Pacific Economic and Political Community – the PEPC.

The committee summarised its final report as follows:

“In essence, it proposes a Pacific community which will eventually have one currency, one labour market, common strong budgetary and fiscal discipline, democratic and ethical governance, shared defence and security arrangements, common laws and resolve in fighting crime, and, health, welfare, education and environmental goals.”

Note that there would be a single currency and a single labour market. Sound familiar? It’s very much like the European Union, I think, except that the differences between the participating countries would be much greater.

Australia would effectively federate into a super-state, not only with New Zealand, but with Papua New Guinea and thirteen other Pacific Island nations.

My hope was that this whole idea would be quietly dropped. So I was disappointed to read today of a proposal to recruit Pacific Islanders into the Australian Defence Forces in return for citizenship.

Dr Mark Thomson explained that this step “would be part of a broader Pacific engagement program and would not just stand alone.” The Defence Personnel Minister has also backed the idea in principle.

There are indications, therefore, that the PEPC plan is still being taken seriously – seriously enough to rely on Pacific Islanders to form a new rank and file in the Australian military.

Tags: Australian Politics

Comments:

Posted by Steve Edwards on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:05 | #

It’s becoming clear as day that there is a deliberate scheme afoot to merge all countries into regional groupings, before conglomerating each geographical bloc into a world government. The elites clearly want to destroy national sovereignty, so “regionalism” is promoted as a vital first step to that goal. Equally, one must view the suicidal immigration policies of the West in the same light - a deliberate ploy to advance the global government step by step.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:37 | #

Steve Edwards, that is exactly what’s going on. It won’t succeed, of course, because all but the whites will hold onto their nation-states, tribes, nationalities, and ethnocultures and that resistance to becoming a mere cog in the Tranzi machine will ultimately bring the whole thing crashing down. One-worldism has been tried before. It didn’t get very far then, and it won’t now. These capitalists never learn, do they! And this new, unprecedented Tranzi-Marxist alliance won’t help, guys: you can’t make a silk purse out of two sow’s ears any more than you can make one out of one sow’s ear.

Posted by Steve Edwards on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:55 | #

It only will work if all cultures have had their education systems thoroughly corrupted by the globalists. The problem is that the globalists only have influence over the West - very important mind you, but not sufficient to build a truly global government.

I’m certain that the cult of political correctness, the “culture of critique”, and general self-loathing, are not being promoted in Africa, China and India. Without that strong element of national self-hatred and emasculation, one-worldism simply will not work. Instead you will see the destruction of western civilisation, and the emergence of India and China as superpowers.

Posted by Lurker on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:11 | #

These regional groupings are appaling. Its not even like they are built on any natural affiliation. USA & Canada yes, but including Mexico wtf?! Australia & NZ yes but including PNG?

The EU is the model for this horror, if that can be derailed then there is hope for everybody.

Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:28 | #

Port Moresby has been mentioned for having one of the highest crime rates in the world. PNG has some of the most murderous peole in the world; a project to absorb them has to come from malice against civilization. This is the leftist approach of the last 40 years; pick an issue on the basis of whether those opposed can be described as motivated by racial feeling. As in this case, it can be a completely invented one. There is no public clamor for combining rich and poor nations; no one wants it except those miseducated by government schools to a passion for the destruction of civilization.

Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:33 | #

If the Australian military accepts people with IQ’s in the 70’s, America had better make plans for dropping its alliances and military copperation with them, because they have no standards.

Posted by Steve Edwards on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 16:29 | #

Australia administered PNG for some years and gave it up around the mid-70s. The place was a shithole then, and remains so today. We give them hundreds of millions of dollars a year in aid, but short of direct colonial administration PNG will always be one of the worst places to live in the world.

You are right - the idea of merging extremely rich and extremely poor countries is insane. The effect will be for the Pacific islands to empty out, while lengthening Australia’s dole queues and filling our prisons.

Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 16:50 | #

This proposal also shows what the left and the tranzi travelers mean by freedom and equality. They mean freedom for aggression, since melanesian and polynesian murderers are to be set loose in a country where human success is the norm. Australia is to be equalized down to the failure and violence of such savages, because the left is a movement driven by malicious hatred against even ordinary human success. The Australian workers’ freedom from aggression is an object of hatred to the left. That he has plumbing, and the tropical populations don’t, enrages the leftist and the tranzi, and does so in proportion to each additional year he has spent in the government schools of aggression.

Posted by ben tillman on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:12 | #

This proposal also shows what the left and the tranzi travelers mean by freedom and equality. They mean freedom for aggression….

This cannot be repeated too often.

Posted by Svigor on Thu, 25 Aug 2005 21:53 | #

Yeah Ben I agree Mr. Bolton is on to something with that line…

It’s a powerful rhetorical trick, fighting fire with fire. Liberalists love such tricks: “what, you’re opposed to freeeeddoooomm? What kind of person arrrreee yooouuuuu?”

It sort of ruins their fun when the “freedom” in their rhetoric becomes associated with “freedom for murder, rape, and theft.”

Posted by Andrew L on Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:12 | #

Mark, well you will Cry when you see what some sections of the religious and etnic community have proposed, and this was Government sponsered.

http://www.amf.net.au/rsch_research_religiondiversitycohesion.shtml