In-Reply-To: <001001c60193$738bcd40$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
Hi Joe.
In this post of yours you make passing reference to "The Red Dean", do you
mean Hewlet Johnson?
If so I would be interested to know what it is you think he "gave up", and
which way do you think he went :-)))
Like many others who made a study of SoCred in the 1930s he had other fish
to fry. And as the wolves prowled around the faithful they fell away for
reasons that were various, with some a matter of cowardice. But, who are
we to criticise ?
Ken.
-------- Original Message --------
X-Envelope-From:
socialcredit-return-3222-kenpalmerton=cix.co.uk@elistas.comReceived: from
q23.elistas.net (q23.elistas.net [216.66.20.147]) by
mta02.mx.cix.co.uk (8.13.4/CIX/8.13.4) with SMTP id jBFGkmEB023980
for <kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk>; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 16:46:49 GMT
Received: (qmail 6880 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2005 18:10:42 +0100
Received: from mail.e-listas.com (66.7.164.206)
by 192.168.0.150 with EMQP; 15 Dec 2005 18:10:42 +0100
Mailing-List: socialcredit@elistas.com
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Post: <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
List-Help: <mailto:socialcredit-help@elistas.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-subscribe@elistas.com>
Delivered-To: list socialcredit@elistas.com
Delivered-To: moderator for socialcredit@elistas.com
Received: (qmail 21386 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2005 17:13:00 +0100
Received: from unknown (HELO pd2mo3so.prod.shaw.ca) (24.71.223.10)
by mail.egrupos.com with SMTP; 15 Dec 2005 17:13:00 +0100
Received: from pd3mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (pd3mr6so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca
[10.0.141.21])
by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004))
with ESMTP id <0IRJ00EMCS0LPG70@l-daemon> for socialcredit@elistas.com;
Thu,
15 Dec 2005 09:19:33 -0700 (MST)
Received: from pn2ml1so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.145])
by pd3mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built
Mar
15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IRJ0018SS0L7VG0@pd3mr6so.prod.shaw.ca> for
socialcredit@elistas.com; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:19:33 -0700 (MST)
Received: from default ([70.66.212.186])
by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004))
with SMTP id <0IRJ0082XS0KYV70@l-daemon> for socialcredit@elistas.com;
Thu,
15 Dec 2005 09:19:33 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 08:20:23 -0800
From: Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Message-id: <001001c60193$738bcd40$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <20051214204041.94630.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] IMPORTANT NOTICE
X-Envelope-To: kenpalmerton@cixcouk.cix.co.uk
X-UIDL: _U3F.63ZoDB.mta02.mx
Bill, I really think you should re-consider. As you've often noted, 'A+B'
was the work of a genius. Unfortunately, it takes an equivalent 'genius'
tocorrectly interpret it in a manner that is completely consistant with the
objectives that ALL 'Social Crediters' proclaim they aspire to ~ freedom
within security for every individual. I believe that you are singularly
gifted in your possession of those necessary attributes.
Given time, and a thoroughness of study most of us will never be able to
undertake no matter what level of intellectual background we possess, some
of us may reach the level of understanding you've already attained. And
certainly that's a goal worth striving for. But many more, in all too many
cases genuinely very well intentioned individuals, will just 'give-up'.
They'll go the way of the "Red Dean". They'll direct their energies
elsewhere, towards truly 'lost causes'. Life will go on, but it will fall
far short of that life that could be lived 'more abundantly'.
Social Credit does come with some unfortunate 'baggage' attached to it.
Andtoo many still want the 'name' to hide their not-so-well-hidden agendas
ofone type of 'class warfare' struggle or another under. Whether that
agendabe 'anti-semitism', 'white-supremacy', 'bank bashing',
'anti-Americanism',screwball 'environmentalism', or whatever. The
surviving 'politicalParties' that proclaim themselves 'Social Credit', or
to be 'for' it, andthen proceed to promote anything but, aren't any
better. We can't changewhat's happened, only attempt to understand it and
find ways to overcome it.It will be a frustrating process. Douglas, in so
many ways so perceptive,has told us as much in the opening pages of
'Economic Democracy'. But atthe same time held out the promise of
persistance in the closing.
It's entirely understandable to believe when there is no visible 'movement'
in a "Movement", that the entire effort to induce some is a 'complete waste
of time'. But if you 'give-up'? Don't give-up, Bill. Use the 'gift'
you've been given. It's too important to put aside.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 12:40 PM
Subject: [socialcredit] IMPORTANT NOTICE
> Bullcrap. The problem with Douglas is that he comes
> with too much baggage. The baggage are the Social
> Crediters (with some notable exceptions whom I shall
> not name). They and their pitiable "interpretations"
> discredit the whole project. In any case, the project
> can't get off the ground in the first place in any
> meaningful way because one octogenarian anti-Semitic
> nut case supposedly controls the Douglas copyrights,
> and nobody will challenge him. And I'm sick of it.
> So my participation is hereby finished once and for
> all. Complete waste of time. I'll let the list stay
> up for a few days for anyone who might want to scan
> the archives, then I'll pull the plug on that too. I
> guarantee it'll stay out of the socket this time.
> This is my last posting to list socialcredit and the
> last I will admit any association whatsoever with the
> so-called "movement."
>
>
> --- Triumphofthepast@aol.com wrote:
>
> Supposing Douglas wanted to convey, as a principle of
> social credit economics, that production should be
> financed with new credits, rather than savings, what
> would you have him say other than what he did say? No
> one with any ear for language or any respect for
> Douglas would suggest that in three parallel
> Principles using "shall be," one of them was a mistake
> for "are." There is really no question what Douglas
> SAID. The only question is whether he MEANT what he
> said. Because he didn't work out by what MECHANISM
> Swanwick 2 should be applied, some people refuse to
> believe he meant what he said.
>
> Michael
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message