By Russell Berman
This is a 22-page eBook that some of you may find interesting
Table of Contents
The Roots of Socialist Repression in The Communist Manifesto …………………………. 9
Criticism of Bolshevism from the Left: Rosa Luxemburg …………………………….. 12
Party Leadership, the Working Class,
and the End of East German Socialism ……………………………………………………….. 16
Endnotes ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
CLICK LINK to open the book
Milrem Robotics Release
Milrem Robotics, the world’s leading robotics and autonomous systems developer, launched its highly anticipated 8×8 Robotic Combat Vehicle (RCV) at IDEX 2025. Representing the pinnacle of next-generation hybrid unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) technology, the new HAVOC RCV is set to revolutionize modern combat operations.
“The HAVOC RCV has been engineered to deliver unparalleled agility and high-speed manoeuvrability, enabling commanders to project force effectively across extended distances,” said Kuldar Väärsi, CEO of Milrem Robotics. “Its robust design and advanced hybrid propulsion system allow for integrating large-calibre weaponry while maintaining precision and superior lethality on the battlefield. As a versatile and reliable force multiplier, this platform redefines operational effectiveness for today’s dynamic and complex combat scenarios.”
At the heart of HAVOC is an advanced hybrid electric powertrain, which ensures an extended operational range and near-silent movement capabilities. These features enhance stealth and make the vehicle adaptable for various mission requirements. By sharing common subsystems with other Milrem Robotics platforms, such as the Tracked RCV, HAVOC significantly reduces development, procurement, and maintenance costs, ensuring cost efficiency and streamlined logistics.
Weighing substantially less than conventional manned 8×8 vehicles, the RCV boasts superior off-road performance, making it highly effective in rugged terrains. Its cutting-edge electric driveline delivers instantaneous torque, enabling faster response times and enhanced mobility. Additionally, the vehicle’s pivot steering capabilities allow for a dramatically reduced turning radius, ensuring optimal manoeuvrability in environments ranging from open deserts and urban combat zones to high-altitude mountain passes.
The 8×8 RCV is designed with a baseline payload capacity of five tons, offering exceptional flexibility for integrating mission-specific payloads or weapon systems. Importantly, modifications within this payload limit do not compromise the vehicle’s performance, ensuring seamless adaptability to operational needs. Furthermore, it operates on a unified autonomy ecosystem that aligns with Milrem’s existing platforms, guaranteeing compatibility and scalability across a diverse range of autonomous solutions.
“With the launch of the 8×8 RCV, we are setting a new standard in unmanned ground combat systems,” said Henrik Kotkas, Chief Product Officer at Milrem Robotics. “This platform combines cutting-edge technology with practical design considerations to deliver unmatched operational capabilities. It exemplifies our commitment to innovation and meeting the evolving needs of modern armed forces.”
The debut of the HAVOC 8×8 Robotic Combat Vehicle at IDEX 2025 underscores Milrem Robotics’ position as a pioneer in autonomous military technology. As defence forces worldwide seek solutions to enhance operational efficiency and survivability, the 8×8 RCV emerges as a transformative asset capable of reshaping the future of ground combat operations.
eWise Blog
The Albanese government has announced an expansion of Australia’s immigration program, allocating an additional 26,500 visas for Afghan nationals between now and 2026. The program aims to reunite refugees with their families in Australia, providing a pathway for settlement and integration into Australian society. While immigration has long been a cornerstone of Australia’s development, it also raises important discussions about cultural assimilation, economic impact, and national security.
Cultural Integration and Assimilation
One of the key concerns surrounding large-scale immigration is the ability of new arrivals to assimilate into Australian society. Effective integration involves learning the English language, respecting Australian laws and customs, and participating in the workforce. Without this, there is a risk of creating isolated communities that do not fully engage with the broader Australian way of life. Historically, successful immigration policies have emphasized the importance of shared values, national identity, and a commitment to social cohesion.
Legal and Social Considerations
Australia operates under a rule of law that applies to all citizens and residents. Concerns have been raised about individuals who may prefer to follow alternative legal frameworks, such as Sharia law, which may conflict with Australian legal principles, particularly regarding gender equality, freedom of expression, and secular governance. The government must ensure that all immigrants, regardless of background, fully adhere to Australian laws and integrate into the legal framework without exception.
Economic Impact and Workforce Participation
A well-managed immigration system should contribute positively to the economy. While some refugees and migrants integrate successfully and contribute through employment and business ownership, others remain dependent on government welfare systems. Policies should encourage economic self-sufficiency by prioritizing employment and education opportunities for new arrivals. This could include requiring immigrants to demonstrate employment or educational engagement before being granted permanent residency or citizenship.
National Security Considerations
A responsible immigration policy should also take national security into account. Border control and thorough vetting processes are essential to ensure that those entering Australia do not pose a security risk. Immigration should be based on merit and alignment with Australian values rather than an unchecked expansion that could lead to social discord.
Policy Recommendations
To ensure a successful immigration system that benefits both new arrivals and the Australian public, the following measures could be considered:
Conclusion
Australia has a long history of successful immigration, but this success is built on the principle of integration and shared values. While humanitarian efforts are important, they must be balanced with policies that ensure national unity, economic sustainability, and security. By implementing policies that promote assimilation, economic contribution, and legal adherence, Australia can continue to be a welcoming nation without compromising its foundational values.
ED: This was a letter to the editor in my local newspaper – well said!
I emigrated to Australia over 60 years ago. On the ship, there were English, Italians, Germans, Yugoslavs, Poles, Dutch, and Greeks—all Europeans—each looking forward to starting a new life in this great country.
I arrived with just 30 quid in my pocket—that’s all I had to my name. Did I put my hand out for help? No. Like so many others, I rolled up my sleeves, found a job, and worked hard to build a future. That was the way back then—if you wanted a better life, you earned it.
Now, I see a different Australia, one where some new arrivals seem to feel entitled rather than grateful. Instead of embracing our way of life, some demand that we change to suit them. If I had arrived here and didn’t like what I saw, I would have had the choice to leave—and I believe that same choice still exists today.
We welcome immigrants—Australia was built by them. But integration is key. Over the years, people from all backgrounds have come here, worked hard, and contributed while respecting the culture they joined. They learned the language, followed the laws, and became part of the broader Australian community.
Yet today, we see pressures to change longstanding Australian traditions to accommodate certain groups. We’re seeing calls for additional public holidays, school canteens adjusting menus without consultation, and even debates over our National Anthem being sung in different languages. Australia has always been an inclusive and fair country, but when does inclusion become surrendering the values that make us who we are?
We welcome immigrants—Australia was built by them. But integration is key. Over the years, people from all backgrounds have come here, worked hard, and contributed while respecting the culture they joined. They learned the language, followed the laws, and became part of the broader Australian community.
Yet today, we see pressures to change longstanding Australian traditions to accommodate certain groups. We’re seeing calls for additional public holidays, school canteens adjusting menus without consultation, and even debates over our National Anthem being sung in different languages. Australia has always been an inclusive and fair country, but when does inclusion become surrendering the values that make us who we are?
This is not about stopping immigration—it’s about ensuring that those who come here embrace Australia, just as past generations of migrants have. Get a sponsor, have a job, pay your taxes, follow the laws, and most importantly, learn the language. That’s how immigrants of the past earned respect, and it should be no different today.
If we don’t stand up for the Australia we love, who will?
Long live Australia!
Then-Trooper Mark Donaldson, VC, remembered thinking to himself that no one was coming to help. In the remote valleys of Oruzgan province, Afghanistan, he and his comrades, an Australian, U.S., and Afghan convoy found themselves ambushed in a savage and relentless assault.
The enemy had chosen their ground well. A narrow valley, steep rock faces, and only one way in or out, perfect conditions for an ambush. The first sign of trouble was a rocket-propelled grenade streaking in from the ridgeline, slamming into the lead vehicle. A wall of gunfire erupted from hidden enemy positions, stitching the convoy with deadly accuracy.
Donaldson and his fellow special operations soldiers knew there would be no cavalry charge to their rescue. If they were going to survive, they would have to fight their way out.
Rockets and bullets tore into the vehicles. A mate took a round clean through the leg and dropped where he stood. Another was hit under the arm, his body armour offering little protection against the perfectly angled shot. Despite their wounds, they kept fighting, knowing that to stop would mean certain death.
Then a rocket detonated near one of the vehicles, sending an Australian soldier and an Afghan interpreter flying. The Australian, dazed but alive, scrambled to his feet and rejoined the fight. The interpreter lay motionless, exposed in the open, as enemy gunfire chewed into the dust around him.
Donaldson didn’t hesitate.
Without waiting for orders, without concern for his own safety, he sprinted from cover. Machine-gun rounds zipped past him; the air filled with the metallic whip of ricochets. He reached the fallen interpreter, grabbed him by his body armour, and dragged him back towards the convoy. The weight of the man slowed him, but he pushed on.
Rockets exploded, dirt rained down, and the enemy fire did not let up. He could hear his own breath, sharp and ragged, and the pounding of his heart in his ears. Step by step, he pulled the injured man toward safety until, miraculously, they reached the cover of the convoy.
His actions that day would earn him the Victoria Cross, Australia’s highest award for bravery. But to Donaldson, it had simply been the right thing to do.
Years later, in front of 120 soldiers from the Trainee Rehabilitation Wing and the School of Military Engineering at Holsworthy Barracks, Corporals Mark Donaldson and Daniel Keighran, both VC recipients, shared their experiences. They spoke of courage, of hardship, of the moments when all seemed lost, yet they endured.
Among those listening was Sapper Japheth Hornsby, a young soldier on his own journey of resilience. The words of the two decorated warriors left an indelible mark on him.
“The most inspirational part was hearing about their selflessness in order to save their mates,” he said.
For those soldiers in training, hearing firsthand from men who had faced the worst war could offer was a lesson beyond any classroom. It was a reminder of what it meant to serve, to fight, and to never leave a mate behind.
“Hearing their stories was the highlight of my career and it’s motivated me to continue a long career in Defence,” Hornsby reflected.
Courage, sacrifice, and unwavering determination, these were the qualities that defined heroes like Donaldson. And their stories would inspire the next generation of Australian soldiers, ensuring that, no matter the battle ahead, they would always stand ready.
ED: From my ebox – name withheld on request
An Australian Army officer has been stripped of his security clearance after ASIO determined he posed a risk due to his strong loyalty to Israel. ASIO assessed that the officer, identified as HWMW, was vulnerable to exploitation by the Mossad and had demonstrated poor security practices.
During interviews with ASIO, HWMW stated he did not view Israel as a foreign government and admitted he would share classified information with the Israel Defence Forces if requested. ASIO also found that HWMW had withheld details about self-defence, security, and firearms training courses he undertook in Israel, despite not being an Israeli citizen.
In a decision published by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, ASIO concluded that HWMW lacked the appropriate character and trustworthiness for any security clearance. The tribunal found that “HWMW is vulnerable to influence or coercion to enable acts of espionage or foreign interference by Israeli Intelligence Services due to his loyalty to Israel.”
ASIO considered lowering his security clearance but determined that no restrictions could adequately mitigate the risk of Mossad exploitation.
HWMW had served in the Australian Defence Force (ADF) since 2004. He was granted a Negative Vetting 1 security clearance in 2008, allowing access to Secret-level classified resources, which was later upgraded to Negative Vetting 2 in 2010, granting Top Secret access.
Between 2014 and 2023, HWMW volunteered with a Sydney-based Community Security Group (CSG), an organization providing security services to the Jewish community. He travelled to Israel in 2016 and 2019 to participate in CSG training courses, which included tactical planning, self-defence, and firearms training. These courses were run by Ami-Ad, an organization funded by the Israeli government and staffed by former Israeli Security Agency members. HWMW acknowledged that these programs were a “natural recruiting pool” for the Mossad.
ASIO interrogated HWMW in security assessment interviews in 2020 and 2022. In 2023, the director-general of security issued an adverse security assessment recommending the revocation of his clearance, which he unsuccessfully appealed to the tribunal.
HWMW defended his actions, stating, “Zionism is an essential theme within Judaism,” and argued that the ADF should acknowledge that Jewish service members may have loyalty to Israel. However, the tribunal ultimately upheld ASIO’s decision, affirming that he posed an unacceptable security risk.
The Labor Party should be required to fund its own political advertising instead of burdening taxpayers. The Albanese government is currently using public funds to finance what are essentially Labor Party campaign ads, giving them a clear and unfair advantage over all other political parties.
At present, the government is spending approximately $100,000 per week on Facebook and Instagram alone, with an undisclosed amount being funneled into other media platforms. This raises serious concerns about transparency and the misuse of taxpayer dollars for partisan purposes.
Taxpayers should not be forced to bankroll what is, in effect, pre-election propaganda for the Albanese government. Political parties should finance their own advertising, ensuring a level playing field and preventing the misuse of public funds for political gain.
An abridged version of an article by Stuart McCarthy
A Senior Army Officer Who Dismissed Sex Abuse Complaints as Alcohol-Related Was Appointed to Lead SAS “Reforms” Ahead of the Brereton War Crimes Report
The appointment of recently retired Defence Chief General Angus Campbell as Ambassador to Belgium, NATO, and the European Union has reignited a long-standing sex abuse scandal within the Australian Army. The controversy, centred around Campbell’s tenure as a commanding officer, highlights deep-rooted institutional failures in addressing sexual abuse and raises further concerns about senior leadership accountability in the Australian Defence Force (ADF).
The Allegations Against Campbell
At the turn of the century, Campbell commanded the 2nd Battalion, the Royal Australian Regiment (2 RAR), during which time serious allegations of sexual abuse emerged. A decorated senior army officer dismissed complaints about sexual abuse perpetrated by a Sergeant, later convicted of multiple rapes and sexual assaults. Despite this, Campbell was later appointed to lead internal Defence “reforms” of the Special Air Service Regiment (SAS) ahead of Major General Paul Brereton’s 2020 report on alleged war crimes in Afghanistan.
Campbell later admitted his initial conclusions that the complaints were alcohol-related rather than sexual in nature were incorrect. However, three decades after the abuse in Townsville-based 2 RAR, survivors and their families continue to call for an independent investigation into further allegations of sexual abuse involving the same former Sergeant.
Calls for an Independent Investigation
The survivor group has presented credible accounts of additional alleged rapes and sexual assaults occurring in the mid-1990s within 2 RAR. They are urging Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to initiate an independent inquiry, separate from the military justice system, to examine potential cover-ups by the chain of command.
In 2012, then-Defence Minister Stephen Smith apologised in Parliament to victims of sexual abuse in the ADF following a 1,500-page review by law firm DLA Piper. The review uncovered hundreds of credible allegations of abuse, prompting the establishment of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (DART). The taskforce received 1,723 plausible complaints of sexual abuse and referred 133 cases, involving 191 separate allegations, to state and territory police. However, it remains unclear how many of these referrals resulted in prosecutions.
Professor Ben Wadham, a defence abuse expert, states that many institutional abuse cases in the ADF have not been resolved through the criminal justice system. Wadham, director of the ‘Open Door’ research initiative at Flinders University, provided key testimony on institutional abuse to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide (DVSRC).
Continued Leadership Failures
In 2021, Campbell warned a class of Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) officer cadets to avoid presenting themselves as “attractive” while consuming alcohol to prevent falling “prey” to sexual abuse. His comments were widely condemned as victim-blaming. Campbell later claimed his remarks were misinterpreted.
The survivor group also accuses senior Defence leadership of the same “bystander behaviour” that generals blamed for enabling Australian special forces war crimes in Afghanistan. Military police involved in the initial 2 RAR investigations raised concerns about similar misconduct at the 1st Recruit Training Battalion (1 RTB) in Wagga Wagga, where the convicted Sergeant had previously served as an instructor.
Institutional Barriers to Reporting Abuse
In 1994, a 2 RAR soldier reported two sexual assaults by the Sergeant to then-Major Shane Caughey, a company commander. Defence documents reveal Caughey dismissed the complaint, citing the absence of any indication the Sergeant was homosexual. In 1995, Queensland Police charged the Sergeant with raping a soldier at a civilian residence. A second soldier subsequently came forward with similar allegations. The Sergeant was later convicted of multiple offences and sentenced to imprisonment.
Caughey received a “show cause” notice in 2001 after an investigation found that the rape at the civilian residence could have been prevented had the original complaints been handled more rigorously. While denying any cover-ups, Caughey acknowledged that his initial assessment—that the incidents were alcohol-related rather than sexual—was incorrect.
Despite this, Caughey was later promoted to Major General and, in 2019, was appointed as an independent “special forces advisor” to oversee SAS reforms in response to the Brereton inquiry’s findings on war crimes. His appointment coincided with then-Chief of Army Lieutenant General Rick Burr’s vocal criticisms of lower-ranking soldiers for failing to prevent war crimes in Afghanistan.
The Broader Implications
Military and legal experts argue that the handling of the 2 RAR abuse cases exemplifies broader systemic failures in the ADF’s approach to institutional abuse. Professor Wadham asserts that the ADF remains incapable of holding itself accountable, making external intervention necessary.
Military lawyer Dr. Glenn Kolomeitz argues that an independent inquiry into the 2 RAR scandal should have the powers of a royal commission to seize documents, protect witnesses, and address jurisdictional issues arising from military-based sex offences. Kolomeitz also drafted Senator Jacqui Lambie’s 2023 referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for an investigation into command responsibility for war crimes in Afghanistan.
The Albanese Government’s Response
The survivors and their families claim senior Defence officers engaged in a culture of “impunity, hypocrisy, and arse-covering,” further exacerbated by the Albanese Government’s reluctance to act. They cite the suppression of an oversight report critical of the Brereton inquiry’s failure to hold senior officers accountable.
Although the sexual abuse at 2 RAR occurred before Campbell took command in 2001, the survivors accuse him and his peers of “turning a blind eye” to the complaints and failing to support affected soldiers. Campbell later served as Australia’s national commander in the Middle East and Afghanistan before being appointed Chief of Army in 2015. His referral of “rumours” of war crimes to the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force (IGADF) in 2016 triggered the Brereton inquiry.
Campbell and Burr have maintained that senior Defence leadership was unaware of special forces war crimes in Afghanistan, a claim widely disputed. One of the most notorious war crimes documented in the Brereton report was publicly reported to the Australian government in 2012, four years before Campbell’s referral.
MWM has approached Albanese, Defence Minister Richard Marles, and Defence Personnel Minister Matt Keogh for comment regarding the 2 RAR survivors’ calls for an independent inquiry. While Defence acknowledged receipt of the inquiry, no response has been provided.
Conclusion
The appointment of Angus Campbell to a high-profile diplomatic role has reignited scrutiny over his handling of sex abuse complaints and his broader leadership record in Defence. Survivors and their families demand an independent investigation into past abuses, arguing that systemic failures and cultural barriers continue to protect perpetrators at the highest levels of the ADF. With mounting pressure, the Albanese Government faces a critical decision on whether to take action or allow the controversy to persist unaddressed.
Abridged Article by Stuart McCarthy is a medically retired Australian Army officer whose 28-year military career included deployments to Afghanistan, Iraq, Africa, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. Stuart is an advocate for veterans with brain injury, disabilities, drug trial subjects and abuse survivors.
Australia is a land of extremes, from its deadly wildlife and vast deserts to its stunning natural wonders and vibrant cities. Whether you’re exploring its ancient landscapes, diving in the Great Barrier Reef, or enjoying its coastal culture, there’s always something fascinating to discover!