Labor’s AUKUS-trated Conference denies debate on key issues

Written by: Nick G. on 24 July 2026

 

(CFMEU life member Allen Harris addresses the crowd - photo Supplied)

Approximately 150 people rallied outside the ALP National Conference at the Adelaide Convention Centre this morning.

It was a work day, so many of the participants were retirees with varying degrees of hirsute grey. Fearing their revolutionary intentions, the police had their own greys in attendance – a phalanx of horses known in SA as the “police greys”.

As delegates entered the Convention Centre, many stopped to greet picketers and express solidarity with them, taking leaflets from various organisations. Others refused to acknowledge the picketers, knowing that they were about to role-play a stage-managed event that is so controlled by Labor heavies that there is no chance to debate key issues such as AUKUS.

Extinction Rebellion members provided a theatrical touch with about twenty dressed in orange hazmat gear with anti-AUKUS slogans on their backs, a loud warning alarm directed at the dangers of war, and a dollar-decorated inflatable green sub.

(Photo supplied)

The rally had been called by the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN), which coincidentally has its own national conference in Adelaide this weekend.

Under the heading “It’s time to break free from the US”, various speakers addressed the crowd. They included US journalist and film-maker Abby Martin, currently touring with her film “The Earth’s Greatest Enemy”; Electrical Trades Union national secretary Michael Wright, who reiterated the ETU’s opposition to nuclear energy and AUKUS; NSW South Coast Labour Council secretary Arthur Rorris, who explained US plans to turn Pt Kembla into a major US naval base; lifetime CFMEU SA Branch member Allen Harris, who began by expressing solidarity with the ETU’s current battle with BHP, and spoke of all the social initiatives that could be supported with the billions wasted on AUKUS; and Labor Against War’s Marcus Strom who condemned AUKUS and spoke of ALP members’ opposition to it.

The picket at the ALP National Conference comes a week after a series of excellent submissions to the Adelaide Hearing of the Public Inquiry into AUKUS. All submissions can be found by scrolling down on the Inquiry home page here: AUKUS Public Inquiry

 

Report on the ICOR Women’s Event in Paris: Women Confront Imperialism

Written by: ICOR on 23 July 2026

 

Under the title “Women Confront Imperialism,” the initiative for a women’s coordination, launched at the Second ICOR Women’s Conference in Nepal, brought together younger and older women as well as representatives of various political organizations from different countries.

The aim of the event, held recently in July,  was to strengthen ICOR’s profile on women’s issues, promote exchange between women and organizations, and contribute to unleashing the revolutionary potential of the women’s movement. The ICOR women’s meeting marked the beginning of a series of events of this kind.

The event took place at ACTIT, an association of the Confederation of Oppressed Migrants in Europe (AVEG-KON), and brought together nearly 40 women from France, Germany, Cuba, Peru, Turkey and Kurdistan. Women from Palestine, Tunisia and Cameroon also participated online.

In keeping with ICOR tradition, the event was opened with a cultural performance, this time by the Anka Women’s Choir.

On behalf of the ICOR Women’s Coordination, an opening speech emphasized that imperialism condemns women to poverty, double exploitation, hunger and violence. Referring to the Epstein case, it was stressed that the imperialist-capitalist system not only produces economic and social devastation for working people, but also turns women and children into targets of brutal sexual violence, contributing to the overall brutalization of society.

“Contrary to patriarchal bourgeois historiography, it was those courageous women who turned the wheel of history toward women’s liberation: Clara Zetkin, Rosa Luxemburg, Nadezhda Krupskaya, Inessa Armand, Alexandra Kollontai, the socialist women’s movement, and all courageous women.”

The speech saluted the women fighting from Palestine and Kurdistan to Bolivia.

The women were called upon: “Let us learn together and expand the revolutionary struggle against imperialism for the liberation of women and of all humanity.”

Greetings from Gaza

Joining online, Palestinian women’s representative and active participant in the World Women’s Conference of Grassroots Women, Mariam Abu Daqqa, explained that the people of Gaza continue to live under the siege imposed by Zionist Israel. She drew attention to the systematic use of sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons and called for solidarity with the Palestinian people. More than 9,000 Palestinians are currently imprisoned in Israel, including 190 women, three of whom are pregnant.

Mariam Abu Daqqa stated:

“All humanity must become part of the struggle against these colonial attacks. This is necessary to stop this genocide. There is only one way to confront imperialism and Zionism: unite our struggle. The Palestinian people are fighting to defend their land. We salute all those who struggle and resist imperialism.”

Also participating online from Gaza was Suhair Khader, Coordinator of the Palestinian Women’s Committees.

She explained that Palestinian women had consciously and politically decided to remain in Gaza as an act of resistance against colonialism. She warned that a women’s movement that ignores colonialism weakens itself.

“The struggle of women must, on an anti-imperialist basis, also be directed against colonialism.”

Khader emphasized that Palestinian women stand in solidarity with women around the world:

“The unity of women is of great importance. Let us develop the instruments of our common struggle. Let us organize campaigns with international impact. Let us envision a socialist future and fight for it. If we want to build a new world, women will be a decisive part of that process.”

A speech on behalf of the Latifa Tamalaah Women’s Committee of the Patriotic Democratic Socialist Party (PPDS) of Tunisia also stressed that the struggle of women must be part of the struggle of the entire working class and of the fight against racism.

It declared: “The freedom of women in Palestine and Kurdistan is part of the national liberation struggle of these countries. If we unite our forces and fight together, we will win.”

The European Coordinator of the World Women’s Conference of Grassroots Women presented the conference and called for preparations for the next European Conference of Grassroots Women in Paris in January 2027, as well as the next World Conference in Latin America in September 2027.

A message of greeting from ICOR’s Principal Coordinator Monika Gärtner-Engel was also read out. It stated:

“Women’s consciousness has awakened on a broad front and is growing stronger in the struggle against fascist forces and governments, against imperialist wars, environmental destruction, and above all against intensified exploitation, poverty and sexist violence against women.”

Monika Gärtner-Engel further explained that journalist Eva Maria Michelmann had regained her freedom through the joint struggle.

“Now the struggle continues for journalist Ahmed Polat.”

She also emphasized that reactionary fascists seek to confine women to the roles of “mother” and “protector of the family.”

Her message continued:

“Against every intensification of women’s oppression, we develop broad alliances across all currents of the women’s movement. At the ideological level, however, we also engage in debate with petty-bourgeois feminist forces which, by placing the gender struggle at the center, distance themselves from and isolate themselves from revolutionary movements. ICOR is a revolutionary world organization. We encourage women to stand up for the revolutionary perspective of socialism as the path to women’s liberation and to organize themselves accordingly.”

“Give Every Anti-Imperialist Struggle a Women’s Liberation Character”

In a speech by the magazine Socialist Woman, attention was drawn to the multiple crises of the capitalist system:

“This is a crisis of existence. For the bourgeoisie it is becoming increasingly difficult even to find temporary solutions or generate social consent. It can promise people neither social security, nor peace, nor a future worth living.”

Referring to the rise of fascism and religious reaction, the speech continued:

“These phenomena are all different expressions of the same systemic crisis. The historic bankruptcy of the bourgeois order is drawing ever closer.
At the center of this crisis also lies the contradiction of gender relations. Here the decisive question arises: How can revolutionary organizations strengthen both the struggle for women’s liberation and the struggle against imperialism? Our answer is clear: liberation from imperialism is only possible if the struggle against exploitation and every form of oppression is waged as a whole and succeeds through the struggle for socialism. The program of women’s revolution is an inseparable part of every social revolution and possesses a consistently anti-imperialist character. As long as capitalist and imperialist relations of domination exist, women’s liberation cannot be achieved. Likewise, no social revolution can realize its truly liberating potential if it does not place women’s liberation at the center of its program. Therefore, it is the task of revolutionary organizations and parties to give every anti-imperialist struggle a women’s liberation character.”

At the invitation of the ICOR Women’s Coordination, which had shared the solidarity statement with Cuba, the assistant to the Cuban Ambassador to France attended the event and expressed support for the resistance of the Palestinian people.

She pointed to the devastating consequences of U.S. imperialist policy against the Cuban people:

“Power outages in Cuba have reached dramatic proportions. They affect every aspect of daily life. The entire technological infrastructure has become a target of attack. There are severe shortages of medicines. In oncology and pathology there is no access to life-saving medicines. As a result, children are dying. We call on all our friends to oppose this imperialist aggression.”

The French ICOR member organization, the Marxist-Leninist Proletarian Union (UPML), also participated in the event. Its spokesperson, who is also an active organizer within the World Women’s Conference of Grassroots Women, delivered a speech emphasizing the strength of women and the necessity of resisting imperialist aggression.

Michele Abe of UPC-Manidem, participating online from Cameroon, also welcomed the conference.

During a joint discussion session, numerous questions were raised about ICOR’s work. Young participants in particular, who were not yet familiar with ICOR, showed great interest in its overall practice. Particular attention was drawn to the Al-Awda Solidarity Campaign.

It was emphasized that ICOR is a coordinating organization that enables people with differing positions to unite on the basis of common principles in the struggle against imperialism and for socialism.

The event concluded with a solidarity video dedicated to the victims of the earthquake in Venezuela.

 

The frenzied race for Space

 

On Tuesday July 21, the federal government released a new Statement on Space.

Space, and particularly cislunar Space or the area between the earth and the moon, is an economic and military place of growing importance featuring a race for its domination and control between the major imperialist blocs of the United States, the European Union, Russia and China.

The global space economy is estimated to have already surpassed half a trillion dollars in annual value and could approach or exceed US$1 trillion within a decade. Few sectors can point to a similar growth trajectory.

There are now more than 30,000 human-made objects in Space, many in constellations of satellite groups tied to terrestrial observation and communication. Leon Musk’s Starlink currently consists of 10,413 satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) providing broadband Internet service in approximately 160 countries and territories. Meanwhile, China has submitted proposals for or two constellations, the first dubbed CTC-1 with 96,714 satellites alongside a second, creatively called CTC-2, having 96,714 spacecraft too, for an insane total of 193,428 satellites across the two networks (far more than Starlink’s proposed 42,000). The submission states that the satellites will focus “on technologies such as detection and inspection in the field of low-altitude electromagnetic space security, integrated security defense systems, electromagnetic space security assessment of airspace, and low-altitude airspace safety supervision services”.

Companies such as the US Marvel Space Communications, the US-French E - SPACE, and Canada’s Kepler Communications have applied for LEO satellite network data for 170,000, 110,000, and 110,000 satellites respectively.

This reflects that the competition in the current satellite field, especially in low - orbit satellite constellations, is becoming increasingly fierce.

The amount of space junk – debris left from abandoned launch rockets and decommissioned satellites – is already a major concern as the potential for space junk-satellite collisions grows. It is the idiot side of the commercial frenzy behind satellite placements.

What is also a concern alongside the commercialisation of Space is its militarisation.

The Chinese statement above refers to “integrated security defense systems”, and the US has created a Space arm of its Department of War (SPACECOM) with plans for armed humans (“Space Guardians”) to be placed in orbit to ensure US control of Space by military means.

Following the lead of its US masters, the Australian government earlier this year released the 2026 Defence Strategy which referred to the new five domains of warfare: land, sea, air, space and cyber. According to the Australian Space Agency, “Space command is now recognised as an important defence domain alongside air, land, sea and cyber operations.”

Tuesday’s release of the Statement on Space identifies five areas of Australian space capability:

• Trusted space services 

• Spaceflight ecosystem 

• Space platforms 

• Microgravity ecosystem 

• Exploration technologies  

It makes little mention of the military objective of Space command knowing that Australian support for the US militarisation of Space will be controversial. However, there are nine references in the document to defence, and it notes that further reference to the military use of Space is kept separate from the Statement:

The Statement on Space complements, but remains distinct from, ongoing work and dedicated arrangements on space technology development, adoption and use by Australia’s national security, defence, intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

A government committed to independent and peaceful relations with the global community would have no hesitation in declaring that Australia will not participate in the militarisation of Space. It would require our representatives at the United Nations to recommend the Outer Space Treaty be updated and tightened to include a prohibition on the deployment of all types of weapons in Space and to prevent the use of Space for directing warfare on the Earth.

Until we have a genuinely anti-imperialist Australian independence, we will never have such a government.

10,000 PEOPLE AT NAIDOC CELEBRATIONS IN ADELAIDE

Written by: Ned K. on 11 July 2026

 

(NAIDOC SA Facebook page)

On Friday 10 July, about 10,000 people attended the annual NAIDOC (National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee) festival and street demonstration in Adelaide. The march through the city to steps of Parliament House was led by First Nations people carrying two banners - "Always Was, Always Will Be Kaurna Land" and "Black Lives Matter".

Land Rights Now was a popular chant and all First Nations speakers highlighted the contributions of First Nations people to life in Australia over the fifty years since the first NAIDOC march in Adelaide and the continuation of this trend for the next 50 years. 

Speakers also emphasised that peace loving people from all cultures from all over the world are welcome to the land of the Kaurna people on whose land the British colonial city named Adelaide was established. Their desire to unite with non-Indigenous people living in Australia and respect for diverse cultural backgrounds was a stark contrast to Pauline Hanson's One Nation who demand a monocultural Australia, a euphemism for an Australia of "pure" white Anglo Saxon culture.

The festive atmosphere and diversity of the 10,000 people at the NAIDOC event in Adelaide was an example of people power in action.

Hundreds rally in Mparntwe to demand closure of US Pine Gap base.

Written by: Nick G. on 22 July 2026

 

Led by traditional owners of the land on which the US military base Pine Gap is located, hundreds of anti-war activists have converged on the base and demanded its closure.

In a written statement, traditional owners the Hayes Family welcomed participants in the convergence. They claimed that the family had never given permission for the US to take their land, known as Kuyunba, and that their old people had been lied to and told that it would be a space research facility.
Instead, it is run by the CIA, spies on people’s communications and is used for targeting opponents of the US and Israel for attack by drones and missiles.

“We don’t want to be feeling guilty all the time,” said the Family’s statement, “when bad things are happening overseas to families – women, children, the old people and their homes. We’re not the ones controlling the facility, but we feel guilty that it’s coming from our lands.”

The Family demanded that Pine Gap be “shut down for good,” and that compensation be paid for the seizure of their land “so that we can get houses for White Gate community.”

(Hayes Family members call for the return of their stolen land.)

White Gate community (also known as Irrkerlantye), sits about 5 kilometres from Alice Springs/Mparntwe yet it has to have water trucked in and power is provided by a small set of solar panels. There is no sewerage.

In 2022, far right quisling Jacinta Nampijinpa Price told the National Press Club that colonialism had been positive for First Peoples. “Absolutely. I mean, now we’ve got running water, we’ve got readily available food,” she said.

Yet she would have known that it was her mother, Bess Price, when she was NT Community Services minister in August 2014, who cut off water from the town camp of Ingerreke/ Irrkerlantye/White Gate, leading to protests by town camp residents against Bess price in September 2014.

Greens senator Lidia Thorpe who met with the Hayes family over the weekend, said "This military and intelligence base, which is aiding and abetting the genocide in Gaza, enjoys security of tenure on stolen land, while the Hayes family are still fighting for secure housing, running water and essential services where they now live at Irrkerlantye." 

Around 500 people participated in the convergence, effectively closing the base for four days as protests took place at its gates.
In Sydney, a solidarity rally with the Mparntwe protests was held outside US consulate last Monday.

Further protests will take place later this week outside the ALP National Conference in Adelaide as the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) gathers to hold its own national conference under the theme that it’s “Time to Break Free from the US”.

 

The Menzies debate (Part 2): Why the denial?

Written by: (Contributed) on 22 July 1026

 

(The Australian people's response to the fascist attempt by Menzies to ban the Communist Party)

The present furore by the Australian Liberal Party about criticisms of its founder, Robert Menzies, carries the hallmarks of those who continue to follow, without question, the basic legacy of a figure portrayed more in line with lower-level, chalk-and-talk, secondary school-type history lessons than with the historical reality. Their seeming inability to comprehend matters arising has been conveniently used to shield them from questionable diplomatic initiatives by Menzies and his associates, which continue to remain highly contentious and problematic.

The pre-War period was marked by a growing concern amongst the business-classes and their political associates about the Soviet Union and its increasing ability to challenge the western countries of the time. Menzies, and his associates, were no exception. The Spanish Civil War of the period provided scenarios which were impossible to ignore. Many figures inside western governments, would have preferred an alliance with Nazi Germany to challenge the Soviet Union, and organised support for such a planned diplomatic initiative. The moves presented serious questions for decision-makers of the time, who preferred to play down the problems which confronted them; political expediency was the order of the day. Present-day studies of that expediency remain an important historical process.

Some British right-wing figures, for example, were clearly colluding with Nazi Germany for that specific outcome; the secret nature of their grand plan carried all the hallmarks of a clandestine intelligence operation. During the mid-1930s, for example, agents of Alfred Rosenberg, who was a prominent Nazi figure in the Third Reich Surveillance Office, travelled to Britain to establish links with supporters and establish the Nordic League. (1) The league was used to then create the Liberty Restoration League (LRL) in 1935, to coordinate far-right, fascist groups and promote Nazism. (2) The LRL subsequently laid the basis for the Right Club which was established in 1939, and attracted secret members, including serving Conservative M.P.s and counterparts in the House of Lords. (3)

Well-placed researchers with access to sensitive documentation about the Right Club have described its role saying it was  'well known that if Britain was attacked they would do everything to encourage a general laying down of arms and the setting up of a puppet state'. (4) The Right Club were 'appeasers' of a certain type; collaborators with Nazism would provide a more apt description of their chosen political and diplomatic standpoint.

The active collusion between the fifth columnists and the Nazi leadership was revealed later, in May, 1941. A senior figure in the Nazi leadership, Rudolf Hess (1894-1987), flew to Scotland on a mission designed to formulate an alliance between Germany and Britain to launch a military assault on the Soviet Union. His flight destination was the Duke of Hamilton's estate. Hamilton had been a member of the Nordic League and had actually travelled to Germany to meet Hess in 1936. (5) Coincidental?

The 235 prominent members of the Right Club were well-placed ruling class figures who were allowed to retain their secret identities until the late 1980s, when their official cover was finally blown. Until that time they, and their descendents lived in a state of denial and challenged the allegations levelled at them as little other than a left-wing conspiracy theory.

Menzies, and his associates, however, had an official diplomatic visit to Nazi Germany in 1938, with the records from the period noting the 'principal object of his visit was to observe the political situation'. (6) It was accompanied with Menzies making the written statement that 'we have no right to dictate what sort of government Germany has'. (7) Following the diplomatic visit Menzies also wrote to his sister declaring 'a degree of admiration for Hitler'. (8) The facts are not in dispute; interpretation, nevertheless, remains contentious.

It would have been inconceivable that the fascist groups operating inside Whitehall and Westminster would not have noted the Menzies diplomatic visit to Germany as a matter of considerable interest. Intelligence and security considerations make complicity inside the corridors of power difficult to prove; the visit to Germany, nevertheless, was openly covered in the newspapers of the day. Diplomatic formalities, however, would have been used as protocol. The trail of interest would also have been noted by the Nazi leadership; they had established extensive world-wide espionage networks to serve their interests. (9)

The espionage networks also included lesser minions who were placed on payrolls for various duties and responsibilities; the aristocratic elite and fifth columnists sought to keep their hands clean, the lesser minions did the dirty work. (10) They should not be overlooked.

The fact that South Australia had a large German community made the Barossa Valley a place of interest for the Nazi leadership. (11) A branch of the Australian Nazi Party was established there in the 1930s. There is no record of Menzies ever having criticised Australian Nazis like he did Australian Communists.

(A 1939 celebration of Hitler’s 50th birthday at the German Club in Tanunda.  In 1945, as Germany was nearing defeat, local Nazis held seven separate birthday celebrations for Hitler in South Australia.)

SA Liberal MP Heine Becker, who served from 1970 to 1997, was the son of Dr. Johannes Heinrich Becker, who had emigrated from Germany in 1927. On 1 March 1932, Becker became a member of the German Nazi Party. A year later, he was appointed as the Nazi state trustee (Landesvertrauensmann) for Australia. Becker was eventually promoted to state leader (Landeskreisleiter) of the Nazi Party of Australia. However, his leadership approach did not impress the Nazi top brass in Berlin and he was removed from his post in late 1936. During World War II, Becker was interned in Tatura, Victoria and in Loveday, South Australia. In December 1947, he was deported to occupied Germany. His numerous requests to return to Australia were rejected.

Australia, furthermore, had a strategic significance for the wider interests of the British Empire. Former German colonies on Australia's doorstep in the South Pacific, continued to be regarded as highly sensitive long after their diplomatic demise at the end of the First World War.

The Australian public service of the day, for example, had direct contact inside the British corridors of power with R.G. Casey (1890-1976) who was a liaison officer with the UK, earlier in 1924. He was close to Menzies, being elected as a United Australia Party M.P. in 1931, and treasurer of the party from 1935-39. (12) Interestingly, Casey was elevated to the position of Privy Councillor in 1939; the executive committee of the House of Lords had direct access into Britain's intelligence services and defence and security provision. In that capacity Casey would have had access to MI5 reports and assessments from surveillance of those regarded as a threat to the British Realm. (13)

Baron Casey, as he later became, remained close to the nerve-centres of the Liberal Party for most of his life, holding a number of prestigious political positions. He was highly regarded, but took many of his secrets to the grave. Some may have been highly relevant for our present-day understanding of Menzies and his associates.

In those sensitive positions Casey would also have had access to information about issues arising about Thomas White, who was part of the Menzies delegation to Germany in 1938.

White, who later received a knighthood, was from a military background. Interestingly, following his visit to Germany, he was an official Australian delegate to an international conference in France where the issue of refugees was a main agenda item. White's stated response to the questions about Jewish migration followed the line that Australia had 'no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one by encouraging any scheme of large-scale foreign migration'. (14) Such people, however, regarded Aboriginals as 'non-people' and therefore did not acknowledge any discrimination against them at that time.

White was also noted, from a far-right position, to have equated the Jewish refugee problem with that of communism, in line with the stated Nazi position of a 'Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy'; he wanted all Jewish immigrants to be made to sign a declaration of non-involvement with communists, with deportation being the solution for dealing with the latter. (15)

The position throws considerable light upon the background role of the Menzies right-wing government to make the Communist Party illegal in 1940; the referendum designed to achieve the same goal a decade later, however, proved a disastrous defeat for Menzies. History had moved on; Menzies, and his associates had been left behind.
 
In conclusion, Menzies, early in his political career during the 1930s, moved in troubled and turbulent times. Making sense of the times involved studying political developments and relying upon the intelligence services for information. The fact Menzies was initially an appeaser is not a matter in question, he clearly was, as documentation has revealed, whatever the reasons and motives for his decisions.

Elsewhere, however, there remain allegations that Menzies made the statement to Liberals in Perth that, 'yes, we should oppose Nazism, but not Hitlerism. Hitler has done a lot for Germany!' The fact that he was not given a senior position in Churchill's Commonwealth War Cabinet, has also fuelled speculation about his chosen position toward fascism. The reason for the decision and question of whether he was regarded by those close to Churchill as not being completely on-side with their position, remains unanswered.

The response of present-day loyal Liberal devotees to the recent criticisms of Menzies has revealed a great deal about their chosen mindset and tenacity; it can hardly be described as straightforward. What are they really hiding behind?
 
1.     Blackshirt, Stephen Dorril, (London, 2007), page 425.
2.     Political Violence and Public Order, Robert Benewick, (London, 1969), page 289.
3.     The Right Club, Spartacus Educational, September 1997, and, Hitler's aristocratic admirers, The Daily Express (London), 12 September 2015.
4.     Wallis, Charles Higham, (London, 1989), page 332.
5.     The strange case of Hess and Hamilton, The Education Forum, 25 October 2004, and, Wikipedia.
6.     Correspondence: A.T. Stirling to W.R. Hodgson, Germany, Secretary to Department of External Affairs, Memo., H150, London, 3 August 1938, Classified: Confidential.
7.     Howard outrage at Liberal icon slur, The Weekend Australian, 4-5 July 2026.   
8.     Conroy is wrong to call Menzies an appeaser, The Weekend Australian, 4-5 July 2026.   
9.     See: Hitler's Spies, David Kahn, (London, 1980).
10.   See: Spies in Britain, Bernard Newman, (London, 1964), with specific reference to Chapters, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, and 17.
11.   Second World War Nazi agitators in the 1930s, German Australia, with reference to Dr. Johannes Becker (1898-1961) who was a migrant into South Australia in 1927. He was appointed by the incoming Nazi regime in 1933 as an official representative.
12.   See: R.G. Casey, wikipedia.
13.   How MI5 spied of Britain's wartime fifth column, The Financial Times, 28 February 2014.
14.   Sir Thomas White (1888-1957),  Australian Dictionary of Biography, John Rickard.
15.   Australian participation and performance at the Evian Conference, P.R. Bartrop, MGIMO Review of International Relations, 4 (61), September 2018, pp. 153-167.

 

The Menzies debate: is there really any question?

Written by: (Contributed) on 13 July 2026

 

Political disagreements about the role of Robert Menzies, who became an important leader of the Australian Liberal Party, reveal far more than what can be observed at face value.

The recent disagreements also throw light upon factors which led to the creation of the party around Menzies and its present-day fate and subsequent fragmentation; emerging from diverse political entities, it is now rife with warring and destructive factions.

The Australian Liberal Party response to the allegation made in Canberra by Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy has added little to the ongoing controversy about the branding of Sir Robert Menzies as a 'Nazi appeaser'. The nature of their response has, however, added insight into how the Liberals continue to regard the whole matter as extremely sensitive; and for good reason, on their part.

Historical commentary surrounding the origins and development of the Liberal Party has tended to be written by those who want a clean-cut image of its founding leader Menzies, rather than serious political and historical analysis. The new Liberal Party organisation in 1944 had drawn together eighteen different political organisations which regarded themselves as 'anti-Labor'. (1) The new right-wing political party soon grew rapidly into a national organisation and part of the Australian political landscape. (2)

Menzies was a supporter of the appeasement trend in Europe. Following the September 1938 Munich Agreement, he wrote to British PM Neville Chamberlain that Germany's proposals on Poland appeared "much more reasonableness than might have been expected", and that a flat Polish rejection could damage public opinion.

Menzies, for example, made a number of highly questionable political judgements, which have been well recorded. In July 1939, only weeks before the outbreak of war, speaking in Melbourne, he said:  "History will label Hitler as one of the really great men of the century." 

In a letter dated 11 September 1939, he wrote to the High Commissioner in London declaring 'it is really quite indefensible for us to be dictating to the German people what sort of government they shall have'. "I feel quite confident that Hitler has no desire for a first class war..." (3)

The Liberal response, issued through the Menzies Institute, about the correspondence dismissed it as 'thinking out aloud to a friend'. (4) The wholly unsatisfactory manner of the response is noteworthy, in itself. As is most of their other 'historical' analysis.

Senior decision-makers do not think out aloud, but respond to sensitive assessments and intelligence reports provided by senior government officials; they also do not then classify the material as Secret without having good reason to keep personal judgements away from public scrutiny.

The controversial letter, furthermore, has to be assessed in the following context: in August 1938 Menzies visited Nazi Germany in an official high-level diplomatic capacity with the 'principal object of his visit was to observe the political situation'. (5) In that capacity Menzies visited the Siemensstadt corporate entity to inspect facilities provided by the company for their workers. (6) During the same period Menzies was also responsible for writing to his sister 'showing a degree of admiration for Hitler and downplaying the prospect of war'. He said "The abandonment by the Germans of individual liberty ... has something rather magnificent about it." (7)

During the period it was not uncommon for political thinkers to draw attention to the rapid economic development of Germany following economic collapse after the First World War. The role of the State, in Germany, to guide economic development was well recorded. And also criticised by those who looked deeper into the nature of fascism and Nazism.

The creation of concentration camps for 'political undesirables', under State control, likewise, was, for example, also well recorded: Communists, Romany gypsies, Jews, physically and mentally handicapped peoples, gays, together with numerous others. They also provided a major contribution toward the wider economic development of the Germany of the period. In fact, the camps were planned to eliminate all those who obstructed the massive flows of capital into State-run corporate entities devoid of industrial relations procedures to challenge exploitation. The politics of Nazism followed the basic economics of exploitation and creation of a German corporate system designed to enslave the working-class and maximise profits.

Menzies, in his official capacity, must have known about the wholesale exploitation, abuse and genocide taking place in the concentration camps; that is, if his advisors were competent enough to read newspapers and discussed matters arising amongst themselves. International aid agencies were assisting those who had first-hand knowledge of the concentration camps and their re-settlement in countries such as Britain from the mid-1930s. Did they read the reports of survivors? Were they even interested? It would appear not to be the case.

On April 22.1940 Tasmanian Labor MP Gerald Mahoney quoted Menzies, now Prime Minister, as “responsible for encouraging the Nazi organizations that exist in Australia to-day, using mean and contemptible methods to destroy the nation. When I walked along one of Canberra's streets with him some time ago he said, ‘I have a great admiration for the Nazi organization of Germany. There is a case for Germany against Czechoslovakia. We must not destroy Hitlerism or talk about shooting Hitler, the gunman of Europe.’ In this address to the people of Australia, the Prime Minister put up a case on behalf of Nazi-ism. He attacked the party of which I am a member because it opposed Nazi-ism from its inception.” Menzies never retracted the accusation.

The closer look at the context of the Australian corridors of power of the day and its subservient nature to that of Whitehall and Westminster remains an important consideration for the wider understanding of the environment in which Menzies moved. From the mid-to late 1930s the threat of war loomed large in Britain; the peace movement reformed and gained considerable support amongst those who had no wish for a return to the horrors of the First World War. The fascist movement, likewise, gained momentum throughout the same period. It was particularly conspicuous in Australia.

The role of Oswald Mosley's Blackshirt movement has been well recorded elsewhere; some of the smaller splinter fascist organisations, however, were allowed to quietly submerge and escape the scrutiny of many observers. They played their cards close to their chests, for good reason; they had no wish to either be identified or be held responsible for divulging their associates. They were a fascist Fifth Column inside the British State.

During the 1920s MI5 had taken 'a passing interest in the small fascist splinter groups … but rightly regarded them as of little significance … during the early 1930s MI5 and the Special Branch began for the first time to pay serious attention to right-wing as well as left-wing subversion'. (8)  

Established in the late 1930s, the so-called British Right Club was composed of well-placed ruling class figures who attended secret meetings and organised in a clandestine manner; it co-ordinated contacts with a range of other fascist organisations including the Nordic League, National Socialist League, the Imperial Fascist League, the Link, The White Knights of Britain, and others. (9) Military links were established as a matter of course. As, no doubt, intelligence connections, through social contacts established inside elite private schools. Noted disagreements also took place over freemasonry; an indication of deeper loyalties and divided loyalties amongst the initiated. (10)

The Right Club, moreover, had 235 members, of which a hundred were female, and included several well-placed Conservative Party members together with House of Lords counterparts. (11) Its membership list also remained secret until the late 1980s. (12) While numerous allegations about its existence took place throughout the decades, the Right Club resided inside plausible denial; that is, until MI5 files were finally declassified, decades later. Its membership had been placed under surveillance, proving their existence. (13)

It would appear inconceivable that Menzies, with his regular contacts with Whitehall and Westminster, did not have some contact with the shadowy fascist grouping and their associates; discourse would have taken place both at an official diplomatic level and in ordinary social discourse through well-placed intermediaries acting as advisors and staffers. They operated subject to parliamentary security and their agendas, however, were not open to public scrutiny at the time.

One political group which eventually merged with the Menzies Liberal Party in 1944 may well have been a suitable conduit for some questionable agendas. It expressed loyalty to the Throne and opposition to socialism and had conservative social policies. 
It was also openly supported by the Victorian Employers Federation. (14)  The AWNL quickly submerged into the sprawling Liberal Party. It left little trace of its previous existence.

In conclusion, studies of contemporary far-right political movements might find listed criteria for identifying members and associates also useful for a historical study of the Menzies period and its associates who moved freely within the newly established Australian Liberal Party circles. They include: primarily white identities, ethno-centricity, strict gender roles, negative images of out-groups, seeming respectability, anti-immigration, together with other characteristics based upon social, political and economic elitism. (15)

The Menzies Liberal Party of the previous Cold War drew upon similar identifiable characteristics, and not by coincidence.

Many Anglo immigrants during the periods of the Menzies' Liberal governments during the last Cold War, for example, were openly supportive of the Whites Only immigration and other discriminatory policies used against Asians. Australia was regarded as more stable than white supremacist Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa for their longer-term settlement.

The baggage of that period continues to hang like a shackle upon the present day party; the controversy surrounding Menzies as an 'appeaser' remains only the tip of an ice-berg. The present day Liberal Party, nevertheless, continue to hide behind their clean-cut and sanitised history; they fear deeper scrutiny about Menzies.

The official Liberal Party response to the Menzies controversy, therefore, can be duly noted as symptomatic of other deeper historical considerations. They reside in a state of denial and continue to worship a tin-pot god, oblivious to social change. The Australian Liberal Party of Menzies was little more than a castle in the air, built on shifting sand.

1.     See: The Albury Conference, December 1944, Official Website: Robert Menzies Institute; and, Liberal Party forms 1944, National Museum of Australia.
2.     Ibid.
3.     Labor attacks Menzies as 'Nazi appeaser' in defence credibility brawl, Australian, 3 July 2026.
4.     Ibid.
5.     Secretary to Department of External Affairs, Memorandum Number: H150, Confidential, Germany, 3 August 1938.
6.     Ibid.
7.     Conroy is wrong to call Menzies an appeaser, The Weekend Australian, 4/5 July 2026.
8.     Secret Service – The Making of the British Intelligence Community, Christopher Andrew, ((London, 1986), page 525, quoted from: File Ramsey MacDonald, MSS PRO 30/69/221 (footnote 122 - page 766)
9.     Fifth Column, and, The Right Club, Spartacus Educational, September 1997.
10.   See: Voices of Hate, K. D. Gott, (Melbourne, 1965), pp. 30-31, with reference to  Arnold Leese; and, Lies and the Law, historyatkingston, 17 October 2024.
11.   Spartacus Educational, op.cit., September 1997.
12.   Ibid.
13.   See: How MI5 spied on Britain's fifth column, The Financial Times (London), 28 February 2014.
14.   Website: The Australian Women's National League.
15.   See: Australian Right-Wing Extremist Ideology, Kristy Campion, Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter-Terrorism, published on-line: 10 October 2019.