Santamaria was a brilliant man – a first rate orator, a razor sharp mind that soaked up vast quantities of information to the point where he was like a 'human' google search engine. And he was an obsessive. An obsessive about communism. Santamaria had forgone the privilege of wealth that he would have so easily obtained if he had practised his chosen profession, the law, to obsess about communism. He regarded it as the antithesis of the Judaeo-Christian world and as a godless materialism that needed to be crushed wherever it reared its head.

So the young Bob established the 'Groups' to fight off communist influence in the trade union movement. He learned the art of recruitment and infiltration. The universities, the Catholic Church, the unions – these all became recruiting grounds for the organisation that was to evolve into the National Civic Council. This Council was allied to the Democratic Labor Party – a Party whose presence in the Senate and whose preferences in House of Reps seats helped keep the ALP out of the Lodge for 23 years.

Come to think of it – this Bob's modus operandi reminds me of another Bob's - Bob Brown. Like Santamaria, Brown is seen by his supporters as a saintly, otherworldly figure; in reality both Bobs are hard bitten street fighters when it comes to politics – and both know the value of the spoken word.

Like Santamaria's NCC, the Greens recruit actively with their strident appeal to the crusading type who wants to believe that there is one issue that outweighs all others – crushing communism was more important than human rights in South Africa, just as saving trees is more important than housing for low income earners in Tasmania.

Here in Tasmania the 'deep greens' are just as fanatical and tunnel-visioned as the anti-communists of Santamaria's NCC. Their near worship of Bob Brown and his brethren in Parliament is reminiscent of the crowds of followers who used to attend Santamaria's end-of-year address to the "faithful" in the Walter Burley Griffin-designed Newman College at Melbourne University.

Like the fanatical communists and anti-communists of the 1960s and 70s the 'deep greens' and their major provocateurs such as Gunns' chief John Gay, are as bad as each other. In both cases they pointlessly lob questionable stats, they throw emotive statements and they offer tired confrontational rhetoric day in and day out. The debate between the Greens and the forestry hardliners never moves on.

Of course unlike Santamaria's NCC that struggled to make ends meet year in, year out, the Greens are now a well-heeled Party thanks to middle class professional groups such as Doctors for Forests which shovel buckets of money their way.

And in recent weeks we have been witness to the petulant spectacle of authors Richard Flanagan and Danielle Wood – both 'deep green' fanatics of the same personality type as those who slaved away on pitiful wages at Santamaria's Melbourne headquarters year in, year out – withdrawing their support for the South Pacific Prize, the biggest literature award in the South Pacific. They object to Forestry Tasmania sponsoring part of next year's Ten Days on the Island Festival.

Presumably Mr Flanagan and Ms Wood have examined the merits of each and every other sponsor of that Festival to ensure that their political and moral sensitivities are not offended by their legitimate commercial activities? Like the anti-communists, who were prepared to ignore US government sanctioned criminal behaviour in Chile in 1973 in removing a democratically elected government because they were getting rid of a 'leftie', Ms Wood and Mr Flanagan are only in foot stamping mode if the company in question is in the business of trees !

The accusation was made of the anti-communists – or for that matter other fanatics such as anti-abortionists – that they were blinded by anti-communism to other, greater social and economic equity issues. Just so, why is it that now the greens focus their energy on beating up forestry companies while providing only a token effort in pressuring the Bacon government to make Tasmania a safe haven for refugees, or in castigating the do-nothing approach of the Bacon government on constitutional reform? For the past two weekends, the Wilderness Society ran full-page ads in The Mercury- at a cost of $14,000 to $15,000. If those green groups put this cash into support for refugees, law reform, or a better deal for low income earners, Tasmania would be a more innovative and equitable place.

None of this is to suggest that most greens, like most members of the NCC, are not sincere and passionate people. They are. That's why they become involved in protest politics and that's why they want to recruit far and wide. But the flipside of that zealousness is lack of balance and the need for the enemy to always be there so as to provide their passion with a continual supply of oxygen. Just as the NCC has fallen away with the collapse of communism, and now seeks to find a place in the social conservatism movement, so it is with the greens. Take away the Regional Forest Agreement tomorrow, give them all they want, and what would be left of that movement? Very little – other than some who would hang around waiting for the next protest bus to come along.