| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Replying to Vic Bridger (and including all on this list). -- Wally | | Date: | Friday, May 13, 2005 07:37:39 (-0700) | | From: | Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 1280 (written by Wallace M. Klinck) |
The same thing that Wally noticed happened
here, Jim. I think there must've been some technical difficulty since Tim
Carpenter's message was also repeated three times as well. Seems to have
cleared up now.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wallace M. Klinck" <wmklinck@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying to Vic Bridger (and including all on
this list). -- Wally
> No, Jim, I received about ten or twelve of the same message. And, I
> received three of this one from you.
>
> Wally
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim" <jschroeder@shaw.ca>
> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying to Vic Bridger (and including all on
> this list).
>
>
> > Am I the only one getting this same email en masse?
> >
> > Jim
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <donzbeth@ihug.co.nz>
> > To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>; <sutton@kingsley.co.za>;
<Walt.p@free.fr>;
> > <murshed@choudhury77.fsnet.uk>; "Wallace M. Klinck" <wmklinck@shaw.ca>;
> > <jschroeder@sympatico.ca>; <hermann@picknowl.com.au>; "L Manning"
> > <manning@kapiti.co.nz>; "Pabo" <pabo@paradise.net.nz>;
> > <weddel@paradise.net.nz>; "Bill Daly" <b.daly@xtra.co.nz>
> > Cc: <corodoor@wave.co.nz>; <nvp@theosophy.org.nz>;
> > <theredbrick@xtra.co.nz>;
> > "Neville Aitchison" <naitchison@farrowjamieson.co.nz>; "Don Bethune"
> > <donzbeth@ihug.co.nz>; <otherside532@yahoo.co.nz>;
> > <john.rabarts@ihug.co.nz>; <ekkirion@rogers.com>;
<philippa@clear.net.nz>;
> > "David Wilson" <wilson_df@xtra.co.nz>; <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>;
> > <james@jamesrobertson.com>; "Henry. Raynel"
<henry.raynel@actrix.gen.nz>;
> > <sooriuk@yahoo.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 4:38 AM
> > Subject: RE: [socialcredit] Replying to Vic Bridger (and including all
on
> > this list).
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Dear Jessop (especially) & Other Interested Parties,
> >> As a lifetime supporter of the Social Credit Philosophy it deeply
saddens
> > me
> >> to read of you initially seeing S.C. as answering South Africa's
> >> needs,
> >> and then because of the incessant arguing and semantics among the very
> >> people who delude themselves into thinking they are S.C. experts
> >> and so must be helping its progress, you become disillusioned to the
> >> point
> >> of forfeiting any hope of S.C.
> >> being of practical assistance while you are still alive...
> >>
> >> Then you will be interested to know that I have a very blunt message
for
> >> those "barriers to progress". Yes, and it comes from the Waikato
> > ex-City
> >> Councillor who helped as NZ Dominion President,Bruce Beetham, newly
> > elected
> >> Party Leader, to salvage the virtually collapsed S.C. Party and
> >> administratively geared it up to increase its
> >> Public Support percentage in every election until we had
> >> two members in Parliament and 34,640 financial Members.
> >>
> >> Then later, it's the guy who led a Waikato lobby group (WEL for the
> > Waikato)
> >> into tipping out the state appointees and getting elected with the
> > majority
> >> of control of their community Board (Wel Energy Trust), and drove it as
> >> Chairman for 7 years until we had taken back ownership of every share
in
> >> the WEL Company, including the
> >> 51% previously given to UtiliCorp in a mates' rates deal.
> >> Within that period, the Trust's Net Equity rose by an average of $20
> > Million
> >> every year, and from 46 Candidates in Two elections, yours truly topped
> > the
> >> Poll both times.
> >>
> >> This sort of track record demonstrates that this "kiwi" does know how
to
> >> organise people into co-operating, and a lot about how to be
successful
> > in
> >> politics. With that as a political CV I recently studied the history
of
> >> S.C. in N.Z. to identify why over all, it is making such poor
progress.
> >> That was circulated to people mainly here in the hope that they may
learn
> >> something from it. However, because it focuses directly on Jessop's
> >> identified reason for losing faith in the people arguing technicalities
> > of
> >> S.C. INSTEAD OF SUPPORTING A SIMPLE INTERPRETATION OF IT,
> >> I have decided to give it an international circulation:---
> >> (The Message and Analysis ran as follows:)
> >> Greetings Group, wherever you happen to be;
> >>
> >> Both in N.Z. and internationally there are many supporters of Social
> > Credit
> >> , but most of the time it is not making the progress that its potential
> >> benefits would certainly justify. This review of the subject provides
> > what
> >> to most people will look like a startling explanation. But before
> >> challenging the analyst to a dual at dawn, be forewarned that no matter
> > how
> >> indigestable the explanation may seem, it has been effectively
> >> demonstrated in the this country's political arena, dominated for 50
> >> years by 2 major parties.
> >>
> >> A + B MUMBO JUMBO
> >>
> >> For a ground breaking exposition of the mechanism behind booms, busts,
> >> unemployment and trade wars, to be still awaiting implementation after
> >> 80
> >> years, forces one to conclude that there must be powerful vested
> > interests
> >> blocking the progress, which should naturally follow the identification
> >> of
> >> any problem. Could it be that the basic A + B Theorem is simple,
but
> > the
> >> mumbo jumbo good intentioned enthusiasts have attached to it makes it
as
> >> difficult as wading through treacle ?
> >>
> >> Over riding the usual handicaps to progress like fear of the unknown,
> > there
> >> must be a "no progress" complex providing much more substantial
> > barriers,
> >> and until and unless these negative influences are identified and
> >> properly
> >> managed, progress will continue to be virtually zilch.
> >>
> >> The first and most obvious involves a sector which was able, with a
> > mixture
> >> of complicity and ignorance or gullibility in the "controllable"
> > political
> >> sector, to convert their money lending networks into a flock of golden
> > egg
> >> laying geese , which could in the backrooms of power, dictate
policies
> > for
> >> elected governments to follow.
> >>
> >> At the same time, the credit creating ability they usurped from
> >> sovereign
> >> governments allows them absolute discretion in the allocation of what
is
> >> really national credit. They alone can determine which businesses
they
> >> want to thrive; to even grow into TNC's , while others denied survival
> >> credit go to the wall during the periodic downturns.
> >>
> >> Because of their ability , including even acquiring real wealth,
> > commercial
> >> assets, and Government Stock, by creating the national money supply
with
> >> their computers, they
> >> have a unique ability to influence the governments who are supposed to
be
> >> running the country. Without in any way straining their bottom lines
> >> they
> >> can be generous to their supporters; and to communities, donating whole
> >> stadia just in return for naming rights, and sponsoring "chairs" and
> >> professorial salaries at universities, so that they can assist
faculties
> >> involved with economics to only have "suitable" books on their reading
> >> lists. (Yeah, suitable IS a flexible word !)
> >>
> >> The Canadian Monetary Commission Report even included a frank
admission
> > by
> >> the chairman of the Bankers Association that they acquired Government
> > Stock
> >> , which they could use to meet their Reserve Assets requirements,
simply
> > by
> >> honouring
> >> their own cheques. Publications considered suitable are those which
> > still
> >> ramble on about the virtually defunct fractional reserve system,
> > ostensibly
> >> controlling the ability of banks to create any credit, and blatantly
> >> discussing the "recycling" of deposits , as if
> >> it is possible to have the same deposit in several different places at
> > the
> >> same time , rather than admit the fact of almost unlimited credit
> >> creation
> >> by the whole banking system.
> >>
> >> And of course the bank supporters are willing to take a sympathetic
view
> > of
> >> local currency conferences and projects , knowing that usually they
> > promote
> >> the idea of money being just a ticket system, so it neither teaches
the
> >> facts nor represents any sort of threat to their dominance. Green
> >> Dollar
> >> schemes only flourish in financially depressed conditions, and just
> >> disappear when a community's resources are being fully employed. More
> >> importantly, the figures created out of thin air in bank computers do
> >> not represent tickets (like Green Dollars), but having the ability to
> > become
> >> part of the Money Supply (M1), they can be exchanged for ANYTHING that
> >> money can buy (Yes, ANYTHING !)
> >>
> >> Those computer figures are an enforceable claim on the real wealth
> > produced
> >> by , not the banks, but the rest of the community. Yet the banks
treat
> >> that new credit money as their own private property, which, when loaned
> >> to
> > a
> >> business or home buyer immediately becomes part of their "Assets
> > Schedule"
> >> , and if it is not returned with interest as required, then the bank
> >> can
> >> sell your other assets, used as collateral , which inevitably wipes
out
> > the
> >> equity you have tried so hard to build up.
> >>
> >> The number of otherwise intelligent people who cannot see the trickery
> >> in
> >> the deposit re-cycling scam, and who think that it is reasonable for
the
> >> privately owned banking sector to be able to create, almost without
> >> limit,
> >> defacto money which can be used to acquire the community's real wealth
> >> as
> >> their own property, illustrates the efficacy of the unwritten "deal"
> >> between big business, the banks, and the string pullers inside the
> > orthodox
> >> political parties; so well defined by Thomas Robertson in "Human
> >> Ecology".
> >>
> >> The wall of confusion and respectability surrounding their activities
so
> >> well protects them from monetary reform initiatives, that in 80 years
> >> from
> >> when C.H. Douglas described the first step as "taking control of the
> >> money
> >> power" , progress has actually moved backwards. In his time, the
banks
> >> only owned about 50% of the M1 Money Supply, but it is now up to 97%,
> >> and
> >> still growing. Educating the public and voters on the real facts of
> >> banking and destroying the myths, must be a condition precedent towards
> >> securing progress in political and monetary reforms.
> >>
> >> NEXT HANDICAP: T H E major contributor towards the 80 years of
almost
> >> negative progress , to the delight and amusement of the banking club
and
> >> their supporters, is the very people who hold themselves out as
experts
> > in
> >> Social Credit, and most
> >> probably dream they are contributing towards the early arrival of a
> >> non-party, Social Credit administration.
> >>
> >> Apart from automatic nationalism in response to an enemy invasion,
> >> history
> >> continues to demonstrate that since the left and right political
parties
> >> climbed into bed and political power with the TNC's (TransNational
> >> Corporates), leaving out Switzerland,
> >> there has NEVER been the legislative introduction of a significant,
> >> reform
> >> policy driven by the public, without the strong support of at least one
> >> major political party. Consequently it is absurd to claim that one is
> >> helping promote Social Credit while denigrating those who are using
the
> >> political road to democratic power.
> >>
> >> Even in N.Z., where a Referendum Right has been secured, we find the
> >> process , unless it can be reinforced by a "binding" obligation (which
> > they
> >> are trying to secure),
> >> can be futile. Of the 8 referendums held in the last 10 years,
> > governments
> >> of the day have either ignored or done the opposite on 7 occasions. But
> >> NZ
> >> does need BCIR, like most other states.
> >>
> >> Were C H Douglas God, there may be some justification for taking his
few,
> >> and very understandable criticisms of the lack of integrity of
> >> politicians and their parties as a reason to have nothing to do with
> > them..
> >> However, the philosophy he promoted did not support that option; but
> > rather
> >> the opposite. The scientic philosophy recommends that after
> > establishing
> >> the facts, we should assess the potential efficacy (in achieving the
> > desired
> >> results) of all the options, and THEN CONCENTRATE OUR RESOURCES ON THE
> > BEST
> >> OPTION. ie: Political !
> >>
> >> So long as it is apparent that the only authority strong enough to
> > "control"
> >> the Money Power is a democratically elected government, then it is
> >> illogical and futile to claim it is achievable by any route other than
> >> Parliament. But that is just part of a far bigger barrier to
progress
> >> than the "mumbo jumbo" problem.
> >>
> >> Scattered around the planet is a sprinkling of good intentioned
> > enthusiasts
> >> , who have lost contact with the Douglas philosophy. Instead , they
> >> have
> >> produced a hotchpotch of sometimes weird interpretations and
algebraic
> >> analyses of what they think happens in the real world; but to put it
> > bluntly
> >> most of it belongs in Fairyland and is irrelevant.
> >>
> >> A sampling of it in recent internet discussion lists shows at least
half
> > of
> >> them arguing about word meanings and/or promoting various mathematical
> >> and
> >> algebraic equations, which for the few who could follow them through,
> >> led
> >> absolutely nowhere.
> >> Even if they were correct, which is doubtful,they neither proved
> >> anything,
> >> nor could be used to serve any useful purpose.
> >>
> >> But they did have two things in common. Firstly, they challenged
readers
> > to
> >> try and shoot them down, providing grist for pointless time-wasting
> >> debates, as if there were nothing more constructive for them to put
their
> >> time into. Secondly, they provided exercises at the 17 year reading
> > level,
> >> which is a guaranteed "switch-off" for average adults who national
> > surveys
> >> confirm jog along at just a 10 yearold reading level.
> >>
> >> If an understanding of Social Credit (S.C.) required an active,
> > university
> >> level computational capacity, then it would never have left the
> >> starting
> >> blocks. But amazing as it may seem , I am not alone in knowing that the
> >> essence of the Douglas Analysis is so simple it can be taught to
> >> 10-yearolds. That is , thanks to Edcom ( S.C. Political Party
Education
> >> Committee) in the early 1970's.
> >>
> >> That study group included varsity lecturer, Bruce Beetham (M.Phil),
> >> Party
> >> Leader and later MP; George Bryant (M.A.) High School principal and
> > writer;
> >> Bill Rogers (M.Sc) ,
> >> mathematics lecturer, and several others of us with quite different
> >> backgrounds. Our challenge was to thoroughly understand the A + B
> >> Theorem, and then if possible put it into primary school language so
it
> > was
> >> politically marketable.
> >>
> >> Our primary discovery was that the complexity of modern industry,
> >> exacerbated by expanding automation and bifrucated, multi stage
> >> production
> >> processes, sometimes including componentry from overseas, made it
> >> impossible to establish any interpretations or definitions in
> >> sub-groups
> >> of B, that could enable it to be used as a formula for computing the
> > actual
> >> extent of the "gap" or deficiency of purchasing power.
> >>
> >> But there was unanimous agreement that the "Douglas Gap" did
definitely
> >> exist, and in quite a big way, as corroborated by the rapid growth of
> > debt
> >> in ameliorating that deficiency , right throughout the country. Our
> >> conclusion was that with proper national accounts and statistics, a
> >> competent administration could readily establish what the deficiency
> >> amounted to; and how it could be offset, without being added into
prices.
> >> It was accepted that the S.C. Party should simply state that every
> >> company's annual Balance Sheet shows that the distribution of
spendable
> >> incomes is less than the prices of their products and services, but
> >> only
> >> cash can be used to buy their output, so part
> >> of the gap has to be filled with debt; which is obviously mushrooming
> >> everywhere.
> >>
> >> The S.C. Party followed the Edcom advice and successfully campaigned on
> >> it
> >> through all that decade. Independent Public Opinion Polls showed
support
> >> for that Party rising from around 5% (with 760 financial members) up
to
> >> a
> >> peak of 31.6% (and 34,640 financial members), being second only to the
> >> governing National Party, and slightly ahead of Labour, the Official
> >> Opposition.
> >>
> >> Against that background of not only what can be done, but what HAS been
> > done
> >> by keeping it simple and avoiding futureless arguments and mumbo jumbo,
> >> it
> >> pains me to see the internet, which could be the world's most
> > educational
> >> tool, being clogged up
> >> with controversial and irrelevant rubbish. Such can do two things,
> >> while
> >> ostensibly promoting an understanding of S.C. It can create more
> > arguments
> >> and confusion to protect further the "money power". For the 90% only
> >> reading as ten-yearolds, it will switch them off reading anything
about
> >> S.C. because it is a "foreign language".
> >>
> >> Were I moderating a S.C. discussion group (as I did with Edcom), I
would
> >> again insist that the right to contribute carries with it the
obligation
> > to
> >> communicate in language not over the heads of the public; and not
> >> unrelated to the real world. And those who lapse into mumbo jumbo
> >> arguments in future should expect to be asked where that line of
> >> reasoning
> >> leads to - other than confusions - and whether they really believe
they
> >> are helping the progress of monetary and political reforms more than
the
> >> debt merchants ?
> >>
> >> Apologies for the bruised egos, but I have tolerated mumbo jumbo for
far
> > too
> >> long.
> >>
> >> Yours in the interests of S.C. making REAL Political Progress.
> >> Don Bethune
> >> ==============#######==============
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jessop Sutton [mailto:sutton@kingsley.co.za]
> >> Sent: Thursday, 12 May 2005 01:09
> >> To: socialcredit@elistas.com
> >> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying to Vic Bridger (and including all
> >> on this list).
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sunday 08 May 2005 6:04 am, Vic Bridger wrote:
> >> > For your further assistance I am prepared to send directly to you
some
> >> > lectures that were compiled a few years ago when I conducted an
advance
> >> > course for students who wished to fully understand the subject of
> >> > Social
> >> > Credit. These are available only to those who have shown a genuine
> > desire
> >> > to learn about Social Credit.
> >> > Vic Bridger
> >> =============================
> >>
> >> Dear Vic,
> >> Thank you for your reply. I appreciate it. However, I will not be
> >> pursuing
> >> the
> >> Social Credit subject, so I need really not trouble you any further.
> >>
> >> I came across the subject quite by chance at a time when I grandly
> > imagined
> >> I
> >> had come up with a more efficient tax-gathering system which I had
> > proposed
> >> to out Minister of Finance with whom I had been in correspondence. I
was,
> > as
> >> a good citizen, looking for a way that would even the tax burden over
the
> >> broadest base and at the same time eliminate the many ways by which the
> >> higher-earners can avoid tax with the ready and able assistance of the
> > army
> >> of Tax Consultants. The middle-earners end up making a disproportionate
> >> contribution to the State Revenue. Then when I read 'Social Credit' by
> > Major
> >> Douglas I jumped at it thinking: Wow!! This is it!
> >>
> >> However, the more I listen in to the discussions on the List, the more
> >> obvious
> >> it is that, even when my own objections have been overcome, it is not
> > going
> >> to be an instant solution to the large discrepancy in quality of life
> >> that
> >> exists today between those who are wage-earners and those who have no
> > source
> >> of income at all other than grants they receive from the state.
> >>
> >> If I thought I could see SC up and running somewhere in the world
before
> >> I
> >> die, I might have a different view -- but I don't see that happening.
In
> > the
> >> meantime our government, consisting mainly of the movement that brought
> > some
> >> freedom and democracy to this country, is doing quite a good job of
> > juggling
> >> the demands of our global partners on the one hand and, on the other
> >> hand,
> >> the need to develope localised industry to serve the marginalised
> >> majority
> >> of
> >> our citizens. Nelson Mandela and his compatriots set something good in
> >> motion which I -- and others lacking in a certain Afro-pessimism that
> >> bedevils some -- are watching play out in our country. So I will now
> >> leave
> >> it
> >> to them.
> >>
> >> However, I will still be on the list listening in to the discussions.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Jessop.
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> You're subscribed to this list with the email donzbeth@ihug.co.nz
> >> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> >> socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> >> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> You're subscribed to this list with the email jschroeder@shaw.ca
> >> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> >> socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> >> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You're subscribed to this list with the email wmklinck@shaw.ca
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to
> > socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> > For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.9 - Release Date: 5/12/2005
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message