|
Supporting J Rawson I make the comment that the
"established churches" are so emmeshed in the present western monetary system
and making so much profit from it that for them to consider our modifications to
it would lead to a major persecution of all christians who proclaim Social
credit leanings. Ironically Muslim Laws about credit and usury particularly the
latter coincide almost exactly with our basic tenets. It is hardly surprising
that Muslim clerics find great difficulty matching their beliefs with western
financial ideas. The two are poles apart. One could almost say they belong to
different planets. The question to be asked is :- "Is the present
"Crusade" against the Muslim world is motivated by the western financial elite
to prevent the wealth of oil rich Muslim states to be used to overturn the
present cosy relationship between the American dollar and oil
trading."
Muslim tenets applied to
the worlds banking system would restore trade balances in favour of raw material
producers at the expense of fiancial manipulators controlling the IMF and the
various Reserve Banks of western countries.
Bill McGunnigle
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 4:16
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy of
Human Effort
I think we just antagonise the churches by trying to prove, or in their
eyes, pretend, that they have a duty to support our particular way of
thinking.
And I wouldn't want to "put off" other groups, such as particularly the
Muslims, whose financial ideas are close to ours. But who have a very
low opinion of Christianity, particularly when a man who claims to be a devout
believer has been responsible for the slaughter of tens of thousands of their
civilians. After first antagonising them by using the term "crusade".
Let's stick to reason, and let those who are interested form their own
appreciation.
Regards. John R.
From: "Peter Haines" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:22:43
+1300
John R said: I think this is an
unfortuate side.
Binding back to reality cannot ever be
unfortunate. Its a ship without a rudder if you dont.
Secondly I answered a question about the
relationship between Social Credit and Christianity.
I think the issue that prompted that comment is
the old one that people repeated-
'one shouldnt argue about
religion'
But that was also accompanied by the same not
to argue about politics. Perhaps we shouldnt argue about money and
economics either because people do get offended from time to time as
well.
Anyone who has read Douglas knows he doesnt
define Christianity in terms of the church doctrines and scripture. He
appeals to the broader principles that have been involved in the build up of
the law and constitutionalism to which economics and politics ( business of
the state ) are inter-related. All this should have been in preserved
in our education system. The Fabians and others have been very
successfulI at rooting this out and replacing
it with their own dumbing down conditioning.
I would suggest that the two main reasons
people who dont understand Social Credit or never accept it premises and
conclusion even if they do prefer another way is because they dont
appreciate the philosophy and secondly they seperate economics out from the
other aspects they are directly related to while Social Credit doesnt.
In effect they separate it out from its true context and thus there is a
block to full reality.
All policy derives from a philosophy. If
any people ignore/lose one they will be taken over by those who do and that
is the situation of the world right now. We are not just fighting arithmatic we are fighting a
philosophy. The first principle regards engaging an enemy is the know
the enemy.
If society wants Social Credit policy it will
have to first appreciate the philosophy that will produce and sustain
it. So lets not talk about it? Is this why people wont talk
about it?
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:41
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy
of Human Effort
I think this is a rather unfortunate aside.
I think that, because of my Christian beliefs, therefore I look for the
most moral approach to economics and politics, which, by luck, I
found as Social Credit. Had I not been aware of it, probably I would
have been taken in by the simple minded "Poor are poor because the rich
are rich" approach of Socialism, which immediately heads off the need to
think further anyway.
But without knowing too much about Islam, I suspect true believers in
that field might well accept it also. Perhaps more readily than
us.
But if we are going to link SC with Christianity, then it is necessary
to define the latter. The teachings of Christ or the vastly
different approach of some established churches? (Including mine at
times.) The work of Mother Teresa, or the uncouth Crusaders rampaging
through the Middle East destroying anything civilised they found?
The Salvation Army or the Spanish Inquisition? (To avoid offence, I
leave out modern examples.)
I suggest we treat SC on its own merits logically and morally, so that
those with fixed moral anchors such as Christianity, Islam and other
beliefs including pure love of humanity can see how well it fits their
approach. To me it most certainly fits closely with the teachings of
Christ.
But lets take a caution. So does pure Communism. But
Communism has never been applied in practice without becoming uttterly
corrupted, and I believe its impractical approach demands this to happen.
"The people" had become "The loud and brutal muscle boys".
Let's try to iron out the factual aspects of SC and practical
means of implementing it, something that has never been done in full
detail, so that if it ever comes to be tried it has not then also been
utterly corrupted in the process.
Regards. John R.
From: "Peter Haines" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006
20:37:53 +1300
Howdy Keith,
My complements on not leaving this on a
negative note.
I assumed that you would have some idea of
a relationship between Social Credit and Christianity although it doesnt
feature much on this forum. So I stand corrected on
that.
There was an excellent post by Phillip
Butler a few months ago on Social Credit being practical Christianity
but you may not have seen it and then of course it may have produced a
number of questions that may need answering first for some to be
able to appreciate it.
You mentioned the comment/ question by
Bill Ryan last year re english being my first or second
language. I wasnt convinced it had anything to do with discussion
as no one on any forum outside of this one has put such an issue as
though it was of any significance. Our supposed conflict of how we
view things for example is more an issue regards any difficulty in
understanding rather than how perfect ones language is. My native
language is English. It was always my poorest subject at school
because outside of spelling and some basic grammar there was no rhyme or
reason or character ever taught that gave it anything to learn about so
I did a lot better at maths. Today it is a widespread problem at
universities in my country. Perhaps being the normal lanuage it
was taken for granted and became a lazy zone for teachers.
Authority of the scriptures is the
scriptures themselves as they contain a common language/ use of terms
and provide the keys to fathoming them. There are referrences
within that talk about studying and proving and searching indicating it
isnt a an easy come easy lost matter however the admonition to seek and
you will find holds true. Naturally a casual interest wont get the
same returns as an industrious student. Then of course there is
the original words of Hebrew, Arabic and Greek in concordances that
given a more accurate interpretation which often corrects popular
teaching.
Religion, philosophy, science all have
schools of thought. The point I made was that it doesnt matter how
popular any of these schools of though are at any time the actual real
truth remains independant although discovered to any degree. For
example the earth didnt turn flat because everyone believed it
was.
I am glad I now understand that
you have been trying to get your head around Douglas' concepts and that
you have been mystified sometimes by the supposed relationship between
Social Credit and Christianity because you having been around for so
long and seeming very familiar with much of what is discussed
one easily thinks you understood a lot more than you actually
do. But it is typical that Social Crediters prefer to talk about
economics rather than the philosophy that is its policy
foundation.
I suggest you do a bit of reading from the
man himself and those who have a good grasp because much of the dispute
between Social Crediters and others of some other school of thought are
really over the philosophy behind the policy, thus it is easy for those
who differ to think we are narrow and inflexible etc.
It also needs to be pointed out that people
who claim or talk as Social Crediters may not in fact embrace the whole
conception and those who are only interested in finance and economics
may be a majority. You will have picked up from time to time
responses by those who intimate that others are not really Social
Crediters like they are.
I recommend you to the alor.org library (
Australian League of Rights) where you will find such works by Douglas
as "Nature of Democarcy", "The Approach To Reality", "The Policy of a
Philosophy"and "Realistic Constitutionalism" on line. All short
booklets. The article "Social Credit is as old as Man" would be a
good start.
Others like "Social Credit and Christian
Philosophy", "Essential Christian Heritage" by Eric
Butler obviously link the two as well as link into history and
constitutionalism. This is the background of the Christian
Philosophy in relation to the English or British culture and Social
Credit, the heritage of the English speaking Protestant peoples in
general. The struggle over finance is not unrealated to that
over philosophy, culture and heritage. Finance and economics are but one policy section/
concern of what Douglas embraces.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006
10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
OK Peter, I will concede some failure to
comprehend:
You say:
"You know very well the relationship
between Social Credit and Christianity."
In fact, I do not. Since attempting
intermittently to follow these discussions for most of five years
I have been often bewildered and sometimes mystified by that
relationship. If it in fact entails an endorsement of Biblical
mythology then your remarks do take on greater meaning for me,
especially your inferences that science and truth can take divergent
paths and that the authority of scripture is based on something other
than verbal repetition (the technique, incidentally, of Islamic
fundamentalists who promote the Al Qaeda solution).
If I have understood you correctly after
these efforts, then I have indeed been mistaken in having spent so
much time trying to get my head around the Douglas
concepts.
And it all does prompt me to ask if you
ever did provide the answer to Bill Ryan's question: "Is English
a second language for you?" You may have answered, but I do not
recall what it was.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006
11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Howdy Keith,
I liked your comments and the use of
Sherlock Holmes but you aught to know better that when you assume
that evolution is science to everyone and the Bible mythology
likewise you punch yourself in the nose.
You own yourself an apology.
I could say you aught to have done your post before getting into
your beer as well but that would be childish.
If my comments were incoherent to you
then it is no complement to you as they were in response to
your unwise assumption plus you were unable to
comprehend.
I wont answer your howler question
about what determines scripture, your contempt makes it
pointless.
You know very well the relationship
between Social Credit and Christianity.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 09,
2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Peter,
I don't understand the relevance of
your comments.
My evocation of belief that species
breed true must certainly be one of the oldest examples of
inductive reasoning, as demonstrated by its presence in a very old
myth. It is neither anti-Biblical (unless you haven't awakened to
the mythical character of the Bible), nor is it a sneer on the
practice of inferring rules (especially causative ones) from the
repetition of what seem to be cause-effect series of
actions.
Of what relevance, therefore, your
comment about throughbreds?
I did not argue that induction was
necessarily a poor procedure; I asserted that Sherlock Holmes
stories are not a good illustration of induction.
You say that "Science like truth isnt
deterremined by popularity or repetition." Did you think
before writing that, or do you really not understand the
meaning of the words?
Then this utter howler: "Same
thing goes for scripture." If it isn't popularity and
repetition that determine scripture, just what do you imagine
is the determinant?
I' do agree with your judgment this
far: It was an unfortunate choice of example because it
seems to have induced this incoherent reply. Why don't you
try doing your correspondence before getting into the
beer?
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 06,
2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Howdy Keith,
I though your choice of a
pro-psuedo-science anti-Bible example was rather unfortunate.
The whole Bible was a detterrent to Marxist theories of the 19th
century which was also a more complete understanding of how
mankind should live in this world, so what?
I notice the thoroughbred horse
industry hasnt been put out of stride due to theories that
a horse might breed a catipillar or a fish.
Science like truth isnt
deterremined by popularity or repetition. Same thing
goes for scripture.
I would suggest that the funniest
side of man has been in the way he has handled science and
scripture and theories about them, even funnier than
economics. As I said it was unfortunate you chose
it.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 07,
2006 3:03 AM
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Since no one else has come
forward to correct John's misconceptions about inductive
versus deductive reasoning, I contradict even though my
resources for carrying through are still a bit
feeble.
I agree with John that just how
Douglas came upon his ideas and analysis is not critical in
evaluating how well they work.
But to say that Sherlock Holmes
represents inductive thinking is to get things in
reverse. The Holmes stories are examples of deductive
logic. Inductive reasoning is of the kind that infers
from repetitive instances a rule that the instances will
continue to recur, because it is a law of nature. It is
the kind of reasoning that led the authors of Genesis to infer
that species breed true because God designed them that way and
therefore needed to save them in the Ark. This kind of
thinking was a deterrent to acceptance of more complete
theories of species and their evolution in the 18th and 19th
centuries.
Keith Wilde
---- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 03,
2006 6:59 PM
Subject: RE:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Believe it or not, the best example of inductive
reasoning comes from the Sherlock Holmes novels.
Collect date, organise it to make it better
understandable, get rid of the obviously wrong answers, and
go and have a good sleep, por play a violin, or indulge in
hectic sport, or... The subconscious mind will come up with
ideas. Treat each destructively to see if it can be
eliminated. The one that can't be is probably the
best, until new data requires it to be modified. It
doesn't matter a stuff where Douglas' analysis comes from or
what are its likely causes. Treated inductively it
remains by far the best explanation of events last
century.
And I believe the various different definitions of money
invented by orthodox economists were attempts to get away
from it, but surprisingly each seems to confirm it more.
Refgards. John R.
From: Triumphofthepast@aol.com
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Date:
Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:04:52 EST
"It
can be tested inductively in that it explains events over
the last century that are inexplicable using the
alternative. . . . Nothing is proved by
induction. But the opposite stands clearly
disproved." (Joh n)
That's what I said, I
think. However, I thought it worth taking some
trouble to identify (1) What is the phenomenon to be
explained? and (2) What exactly IS the
hypothesis?
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Shop ‘til you drop at XtraMSN
Shopping
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 nschwartz@cogeco.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 cymric@xtra.co.nz
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 nschwartz@cogeco.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 cymric@xtra.co.nz
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 nschwartz@cogeco.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 cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
ed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Find the coolest online games at XtraMSN Games
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 cymric@xtra.co.nz
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
