|
Maybe the problem so many of us have is
that it's often difficult for us to see the 'whole picture' in the manner
that Douglas seemed so easily to be able to. It seems to me he's just so
far ahead of all of us, we've got to put a lot of effort into thinking
through things we don't normally give the necessary thought to.
And then how to relate those things to everything else. Speaking
for myself, this is definitely a skill that requires a lot of
development.
In my opinion, and this comes from one who
originally thought 'interest' had a far different bearing on things than it
apparently has, Bill Ryan seems to make a pretty credible case for his
interpretation of Douglas's financial proposals. I haven't seen very
much on which he could be refuted 'financially'. And even the little I have seen
where he might be wrong, he just as well may not be. (I don't think it
worth getting too hot and bothered about the actual origins and
intended meaning of the word 'mortgage'. And the few places
where I've noticed a seemingly 'technical' difference between Vic and Bill, it's
seemed to me that they were both just explaining almost the same thing a
slightly different way, and both were likely correct.)
As for many of the more 'political' aspects of
Social Credit philosophy, things with which Douglas's later works were more
concerned, there hasn't yet been much written on here about that. Perhaps
we'll get into discussing what some of those works contain, and their
correctness, as we go along. I doubt there would be anything written
by Douglas on any aspect of 'Social Credit' that would be "off-topic" on a list
dedicated to trying to understand his life's work better. Personally, I
would welcome the opportunity to hear what anyone has to say on some of the
later books, and leave the seemingly endless repetitiousness of 'interest' alone
for awhile. We can always come back to it, and if the 'history' of this
List is any indicator, we no doubt will.
Best wishes to all,
Joe Thomson
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 9:46
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
relevance
At 08:25 AM 19/10/2004 -0700, Bill Ryan wrote:
... This is intended to be a list
for discussing
Social Credit, for god's sake.
This has the appearance of a list
intended to rigidly reinforce
a narrow ideological line, as endlessly
promulgated by Bill
Ryan. My assessment is that many of the views
expressed
by Bill do not represent the views of a majority of social
crediters, or even the original views of Douglas in any sort of
broad,
objective or fair-handed manner. Only certain aspects
of SC philosophy and
ideas have been selected by Bill as
being "on-topic".
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
