Whitlam and the Fabian Socialism


(Ideology) is what gives the evildoing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary  steadfastness and determination. (It) helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad, in his own and others eyes, so that he won’t hear reproaches and curses, but will receive praise and honours. (Solzhenitsyn)


A torch can be used both for illumination and arson. The Fabian Society was created in Great Britain in 1883. The principles were mostly based on the socialist ideas of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Fabians believe that any action, which will bring the greatest good, happiness and pleasure to the greatest number of people, is good. The end justifies the means. They, of course decide which end is correct and decided it would be  socialism. Socialism would be established by the will of the majority of people. On that point they disagreed with Marxists. Basically socialism not by violence, but by trickery. The difference for a victim is similar to that, between an armed robber and a conman. Their historical inspiration is Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator (the Delayer), who, by his tactics of burnt land tired Hannibal and thus brought Carthage to the eventual defeat.

The Fabians helped to create the Labour Party of Great Britain and to this day proudly mention their founders, George Bernard Shaw, Sidney Webb, Beatrice Webb and H.G. Wells. As a matter of interest, in 1923 S. Webb wrote “The Decay of Capitalist Civilization” and in 1935 “Soviet Communism: A New Civilization?” In 1935 new soviet civilisation could already proudly count at least 10 million victims. British Fabians are proud of their significant politicians, all naturally of the Labour Party: Tony Blair, Neil Kinnock, Michael Foot, Harold Wilson, Hugh Gaitskell and Clement Attlee.

As an organisation,  they are not overly numerous, concentrating on people influential, ambitious, arrogant and in particular amoral. Their crest, until recently, was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I am not too partial to quoting “the greats” of Marxism-Leninism, but Engels’ letter to Kautsky in September 1892 is reasonably accurate: “..a clique of  bourgeois “socialist” of diverse calibres, from careerists to sentimental socialists and philanthropists, united only by their fear of the threatening rule of the workers and doing all in their power to spike this danger by making their own leadership secure, the leadership exercised by the “eddicated (sic).””


“The means employed by the Fabian Society are just the same as those of the corrupt parliamentary politicians: money, intrigues, careerism.”


“In spite of all this I do not ask you to treat these people as enemies.”

With the expression useful idiots, Lenin came later.

During  World War II G.D.H.Cole wrote: “It used to be objected to us, that socialism has undoubtedly beautiful and noble ideals, but cannot be put into practice. It was said to us, that it is negated by “human nature”.That argument cannot stand today. Regardless,  socialism proved itself, and that for a whole two decades in one of the largest countries of the world. The system, established in 1917 in the Soviet Union, has many errors, but it eliminated unemployment and began to produce goods up to the very limit of production capacity. It was said that the socialist state inevitably would collapse, because its population would consume all, what can be produced, without leaving in reserve an appropriate supply to accumulate new production capacity. That argument also has no validity, because the Soviet Union placed into its capital reserves probably larger part of its national product, then at any time could any capitalist state, though it was forced to provide enormous expenditure for armaments for eventual self-defense.”

Were comrade Cole still alive, he undoubtedly would list Cuba and Zimbabwe as the successful examples of socialism.

Fabians are not harmless dreamers. Cole mentions two sections of the economy, to which after the war  the socialist would have to pay attention, mining and the press. They did pay attention. Both suffered prolonged strikes and the coal strike almost bankrupted Britain.

Who was that Quintus Fabius Maximus, whom Romans in 217 B.C. , a year after Hannibal’s crossing of Alps, elected as their dictator and whom after more than two thousand years some sly socialists picked up as an example? His first worry was that Romans are not sufficiently religious. Today perhaps we would say not sufficiently politically correct. Nevertheless, we have to go a little bit back to history, albeit simplified. Qart Hadasht, meaning New Town (corrupted by Romans and English to Carthage) was a trading village established by Phoenicians in 814 B.C., approximately a half a century before Rome. Both villages grew and traded so successfully, that not even 600 years later the Mediterranean became too small and they had to fight. Rome and Carthage entered into a few peace treaties, the last in 241 B.C., assuring Rome that Carthage is not interested in Italy, as long as Rome leaves alone their Sicily. Rome, of course, could not leave anything alone. Carthage had no naval force to speak of, so Hannibal decided to walk to Rome, with elephants, across Spain and the Alps. He expected to defeat Roman legions in a battle, or at least defeat enough to make Romans not ignore peace treaties in the future. The first assumption proved correct. Hannibal trounced the Roman legions, if he could find them. Fabian avoided battles, knowing that Hannibal is not strong enough to besiege Rome itself. The result was that Hannibal wandered the length and width of Italy for 16 years and what was not eaten and burnt by Hannibal’s mercenaries, was burnt by Fabius. I leave it to the reader to consider the consequence of Fabian’s successful (for the Roman power elite, that is) and by today’s Fabians still lauded strategy on the people of Italy. People never know what is good for them.

Comrade Jungwirth in the preface to the Snapshots of Hope. The Making of Modern Labor. A Decade of landmark speeches to the Fabians writes:- “Australia had its first Fabian Society as early as 1895, and 1947 saw the establishment of the Victorian Fabian Society, which became the Australian Fabian Society in 1984. The AFS is the largest Fabian body ever to exist outside Britain itself. It operates nationally, with members in every state and territory.


Gough Whitlam adopted the Fabian approach from the day he entered Parliament, and the seminal 1972 Whitlam policy speech was a drawing together of the threads of twenty years of systematic Fabian research and planning.


Arthur Calwell before him was always proud to call himself a Fabian, and the tradition has been carried on through Bill Hayden, Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, John Bannon, Neville Wran and Bob Carr.”


I would add Julia Gillard and God knows whom else. Because in law “conspiracy” has definite meaning, I would never write what former ALP minister Barry Jones said in his speech to the Fabians in November 1990- “…that conspiratorial group which has helped to change the face of the world, the Australian Fabian Society.” A member of the Australian Fabian Society must not be a member of any other party but the correct one, the  ALP.

When in 1972 Australia chose Labor, the leader of the ALP and of the Fabian Society, Gough Whitlam decided to rule for a while just with his deputy Barnard. For 13 days sat Whitlam in 13 armchairs and made about 40 serious decisions. Among others, Australia accepted the annexation of Baltic republics by the Soviet Union, established diplomatic relations with the dictatorships of Cuba, China and North Vietnam, cancelled those with democratic Taiwan, abolished conscription and amnestied deserters.  Later, in 1973, with the full complement of ministers, in order to help Australian industry, canceled the development of a light destroyer and cut tariffs across the board by 25%. These are just examples.

Interesting, though not surprising is that Fabians still regard Whitlam’s record as good, though it was mostly to Australia’s detriment. Australia’s detriment, not to the socialist ideology detriment. To this very day they pretend that poor Whitlam did not know about “loan” negotiations with Ghadaffim to finance the post-dismissal election campaign and previous financial machinations with Khomlenim.  Gareth Evans said about the Whitlam’s rule “there never will be another one like that”. Let’s hope. Unfortunately, Whitlam was not alone and his acolytes are still causing damage.

Do they mean well? Is it just a handful of idealists? Are the others worse? In times of laissez-faire capitalism, socialism could look like an acceptable alternative. In 1917 the socialists acquired power and had opportunity to apply their humanitarian ideals. Since then socialists killed 170 million people and when we add, in my opinion correctly the victims of national socialists, NSDAP, it is more than 200 million lives on their conscience.  Unfortunately, the count goes on.

The left, including Fabians overlooks the crimes of their comrades to this very day. 17, 000 supposed victims of Pinochet are brandished at every opportunity, but 70,000 killed by Castro’s socialist dictatorship, for them do not exist. Their excuses confirm murderers in their conviction, that they do good. They may occasionally drop a few tears, when their comrades forget about TV cameras, as e.g. Bob Hawke after the Tiananmen Square massacre and say, “we are different”. It is true, from their point of view, that it is a different power clique. SA and SS also did not like each other. For us the difference between Fabian socialism and Marxist socialism, is as between a frying pan and a fire. Would you prefer Trotsky or Stalin to decide about your existence or nonexistence? In power struggles ideologies are only red herrings, but by now it ought to be clear to everybody that from blood-red ideology, through blood brown to the pink one, socialism always leads to great human suffering, besides which other ideologies or religions are just hopeless muddlers.

The Australian Fabian Society replaced a wolf in sheep’s clothing by a turtle. Panda may come later. The original crest was more sincere, even though maybe a hyena… The spots would not be discernible under that snow-white skin anyway.

Back to the history. Rome won. Religious, elderly Fabius was pushed aside five years before Hannibal returned to Africa. Carthage was not defeated by Fabius, but by Scipio Africanus.  It was the beginning of the end of the Roman republic.

Mathew 7, 15-20 :- “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit: but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

© PAUL JACKO  september 2008


G.D.H. Cole – Fabiánský socialismus Melantrich  1947

Ernie Bradford – Hannibal  1981 Macmillan London Limited

G. Jungwirth – Snapshots of Hope. The Making of Modern Labor. A Decade of landmark speeches to the Fabians Australian Fabian Society Pluto Press Australia Limited 1998

Lewis S. Feuer – Marx and Engels Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy. Fontana 1969

R. Conquest – Harvest of Sorrow  Pimlico 2002

About Paul Jacko

Jacko was born in Czechoslovakia not long before the communist putsch in February 1948. He studied industrial chemistry there and left in 1969 for Australia, where he became a lawyer and established his own practice. He has now retired and beside hunting, fishing, camping, prospecting and playing golf he amuses himself by writing.
This entry was posted in Australia, Culture, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Whitlam and the Fabian Socialism

  1. Milan Skarka says:

    As a thriving survival of a socialist/communist slavery/serfdom I am continually amazed at the populous affinity for self-destruction of the people. We want the government to guarantee our health, deflect hurricanes, educate our children and license us to drive; we want to be told what to eat, what to smoke and who to marry. We are justly proud of the fact that no enduring society has ever incarcerated more of its people. Noting that a policeman has a pistol, a club, a stun gun, a can of pepper spray and a database that includes us, we feel happy and secured.

    Our submission is evident. We want to be operated like puppets and provide for like pets.

    The terrorists hate our freedom. But we should be comfortable with that. We hate our freedom too.

  2. If you can conceive of society as a giant bureaucracy it all makes sense. The soft totalitarian regulations that pervade all modern democracy, that stifle real freedoms. I believe also that the actual defintion of freedom has changed in the public perceptions. Pavel and I will have a few essays on this hopefully soon.

  3. Milan Skarka says:

    I think this debate is good, however, in words of H.L. Mencken: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

  4. It’s one of those, “if I told you, you wouldn’t believe me” historical accounts

  5. Ticiane says:

    The post is old but I still agree, though the Red-head and red-heart Julia surpassed Gough.

  6. Dirk says:

    Those useful idiots are now everywhere, mostly in universities and media. Politicians like to think they are the “players”, but are only puppets of more sinister forces. Otherwise – great information, i’m going to recommend it to all my friends.

  7. Trumpete says:

    If not for Julia, GW would be the most incompetent PM, yet the Left loves him. Is there a message in it?

  8. rosy eyes says:

    Whitlam will be made a saint. Have a nice holiday weekend!

  9. Mariochett says:

    The rot sets in and is not even noticed now.

  10. Elis says:

    They are all fabians. Or freemasons?

  11. Alvinor says:

    Consistent and wise words.

  12. Surmount says:

    I do consider all the ideas you’ve introduced on your post. They’re really convincing and can definitely work. Still, you treated Whitlam and the fabian malaise with kid gloves.

  13. Odonow says:

    That dishonest relic! Isn’t it time?

  14. Mordechai says:

    Thanks to Julia, Gough will not have the ‘honour’ of being the worsts PM. But he was a nasty piece of goods, no doubt.

  15. Skabope says:

    What a disgusting fella!

  16. Tumorgo says:

    Admirers of Whitlam and Stalin mostly overlap – not surprising at all.

  17. Homer says:

    Keep on writing, great job!

  18. Bea says:

    What a mess!

  19. Mckinley says:

    How typical of you rednecks! Denigrating good socialist – what next? Will you write that Ms Gillard is dishonest?

  20. P Carder says:

    A pussycat compared to Julia.

  21. Jerry Pavis says:

    Nasty man, nasty people, nasty ideology.

  22. Pingback: O. Goodle

  23. the diet man says:

    At least he will not be the wworst PM Australia had so far. That Gillard woman beat him easily.

  24. Pingback: Mozzie

  25. Pingback: オ

  26. Manuel Proto says:

    Wow, awesome blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.

  27. Pingback: glimer of hope

  28. D Trong says:

    I’ve been browsing on-line more than three hours lately, but I never found a fascinating article like yours. I do not like socialism, by the way.

  29. Bota Kotor says:

    Whitlam is a snake oil salesman – a socialist politician. Somebody ought to write an honest biography of him.

  30. Stend By says:

    Whitlam was a disgrace to humanity. Why did you vote for him?

  31. Golden Braor says:

    Hello there I am so delighted I found your weblog, I really found you by error, while I was searching on Digg for something else, Regardless I am here now and would just like to say thank you for a remarkable post and a all round exciting blog (I also love the theme/design), I don’t have time to go through it all at the minute but I have book-marked it and also added your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read much more, Please do keep up the superb work. That Whitlam must have been a real bastard. When did he die?

  32. Theophila says:

    A very nasty fellow. But still with many followers, equaly nasty.

  33. Goldenmor says:

    And he’s still a hero to the mindless leftists…

  34. R Toybyson says:

    The persistent worship of Whitlam is a good proof of everlasting human naivete.

  35. Fred Sisbob says:

    What’s up colleagues? It’s great piece of writing, keep it up all the time. I wonder what the next speech by Julia G to her Fabian comrades will be all about.

  36. ex-soc says:

    I used to believe him, and I apologise. It was such time… now? Only the very simple ones or very devious can say that socialism works.

  37. Pharasmore says:

    Not a nice fellow, that hero of yours, but, you will admit, very sucessful.

  38. Cheary Torts says:

    And that **** is the Aussie leftists hero?

  39. MacFarlan Joe says:

    With 35 to 45% voting the socialist way, hypocrite Whitlam will be sainted soon.

  40. Move to France says:

    Very devious chap, that comrade Gough, eh? Who voted for him?

  41. Personal Injun says:

    A magnificent post, very informative. I ponder why the other specialists of this
    sector do not notice this. Jealous? You must continue your writing.

  42. Dewain says:

    A lot of dead people can thank the hypocrites like Whitlam.

  43. Dee Wikimay says:

    Hi there! This article couldn’t be written any better! What a leftist swine!

  44. Tromerto says:

    Amazing things here. I am very glad to see something confirming my opinion of that hypocrite.

  45. Fatoss says:

    Unpleasant pisant.

  46. Jolie Good says:

    I’m not sure why I used to dislike that fellow so much, but your post makes it a bit clearer.

  47. Gold Mass says:

    Very nasty man!

  48. Windomatt says:

    It’s remarkable that so many people think he was good. Well, many people think the same of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Elsa Koch…

  49. S Domainoff says:

    Let’s hope this is the last we hear of him.

  50. Farmount says:

    Touche. Solid arguments. Keep up the great work.

  51. Growler says:

    This is a topic that is near to my heart…Leftwing corruption and hypocrisy. Thank you!

  52. Doman Dee says:

    Throughly disgusting lawyer, that GW.

  53. Fred Motovil says:

    Thanks for a marvelous posting! I definitely enjoyed reading it,
    you will be a great author. (I dislike Whitlam)

  54. Joleen says:

    I read a lot of interesting articles here. Probably you spend a lot of time

  55. Garcia No Comprar says:

    Whitlam is responsible for many things, including s 18C !

  56. D Sylopin says:

    Great post. Hardly any Australian did more damage to Australia then him.

  57. Go Moole says:

    Rather upseting that some people still believe in this fraud.

  58. Pingback: Gough Winton

  59. Doctor Pat says:

    His sins are numerous and so are the lies pedled about him by the media. His death makes no change.

  60. Noel Massine says:

    The adulation is sickening. That man was the enemy of Australian people.

  61. Laurie Beech says:

    That ABC is crazy. Can’t people see through their lies? Whitlam was, WAS, a distaster.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>