|
Message 3883
|
|
< Previous | Next >
|
|
|
| Subject: | [socialcredit] Re: Replying to Jeff:- Mancur Olsen | | Date: | Tuesday, May 2, 2006 07:59:08 (-0700) | | From: | William B. Ryan <w_b_ryan @.....com>
|
Perhaps, Bill, you will describe how these other
peoples determined longitude. If they could not have
determined longitude they could not have established
reliable trade routes across open oceans, and any
colonies established would have had to have been
self-sustaining in essentially complete isolation.
They would from the point of colonization have been
entirely dependent on the exploitation of locally
available resources, which seems to have been the case
with Polynesia.
The navigational method utilized by Columbus was
predicated on the development of accurate clocks that
could be carried on ships. The clock on leaving port
would have been synchronized to, let's say, the same
time as Lisbon. Somewhere on the ocean, beyond the
sight of land, the local time would have been
determined, say, at sunrise or sunset. The local time
would have been compared to the Lisbon time on the
ship's clock. The difference between the local time
and Lisbon's would have told the ship's navigator how
far he was west or east of Lisbon. His latitude would
have been determined at night by observing the
position of the stars with his sextant.
Please describe the technology involved that allowed
these non-European peoples to navigate across open
oceans without accurate clocks, or triangulation
between two or more fixed signals from radio
transmitters whose positions are known. Or forward to
us a photocopy of the relevant chapter from the book.
At any rate, I seriously doubt the navigational
methods to be described were not "'more crudely' or
'less' 'developed'" than the method utilized by
Columbus and his contemporaries, which was the
totality of my very elementary point. But such
"tangible" technologies are easily diffused.
On the other hand, Mancur Olsen's extremely profound
observation was about technologies of social
interaction, which are not so easily recognized,
understood, or replicated.
Economics and political science include the study of
ill-defined ranges of those technologies.
Which include political and financial systems.
--- "W. McGunnigle" <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz> wrote:
Reply to William B.Ryan
Although there may be some
truth in your initail comment about non-western and
Islamic banking systems, your example for comparison
about navigation is woefully mistaken. Not only is it
incorrect, it also denigrates the navigational ability
of the people who colonised the Pacific Islands long
before "western navigators" entered the region. My
research, along with several other prominent
antipodean historians, indicates that Pacific
Islanders were capable of ACCURATE long distance
navigation over thousands of kilometeres IN BOTH
DIRECTIONS.
One example of such research is the book by Professor
Kerry Howe of Massey University New Zealand. Called "A
Question of Origin", it is an eminently readable book
dealing with the arguments from where the Polynesian
originated and devotes an entire chapter to the
methods whereby accurate navigation across wide
expanses of ocean were made using relatively
rudimentary equipment. I would also point out that
Arabian, Indian and Chinese merchant ships traded
extensively through out the Indian and Western Pacific
Oceans long before Europeans even knew about the area.
That task required reasonably sophisticated navigation
to ensure you arrived at your destination.
I also point out that very accurate maps of those
regions existed as early as the 10th century. Maps
that bear comparison with the Mercalli projections of
today. These were discovered in Constantinople
(Istanbul) by Portugese mariners in the 15th century
and copies were stored in the great Library of Lisbon.
Unfortunately they were destroyed along with the
Library in the great Lisbon Earthquake of 1755. Recent
historical research seems to indicate that Columbus,
(a portugese mariner) did not sail blindly across the
Atlantic, but made that initial journey based on
information gleaned from the previously mentioned
maps. These facts undermine your postulation that
western nations had a monopoly in the arts of
Charting, map making and navigation. History also
supports the argument that, during the "Dark Ages" in
Europe, flourishing and sophisticated civilisations
not only existed in China, India and the Arabian
world, but were also responsible for significant
advances in Mathematics (invention of zero), Science,
and Technology. Navigation, a sub branch of
mathemetics, was one of those areas.
As for the Islamic banking system being primitive may
I respectfully point out that Islamic banking is
controlled by Islamic law. Usury is illegal funds can
be lent to an enterprise but include a sizeable risk
factor. Unlike western banks who can place companies
in receiveship and then have first chance to seize the
lions share of that companies remaining assetts to
cover the "debt " to the bank, under Islamic law no
one gets preferential treatment. The bank takes the
same "loss" as everyone else. I don't know if this is
"primitive" or not, but, to me at least, it certainly
contains a large element of "Natural Justice". No one
attempting to bankrupt someone else and cause a great
deal of upset by that process should be allowed
benefit disproportionately from actions they have
initiated. Consequently Muslim banks are more
reluctant to place people in receivership in Muslim
countries because of the way the law operates. They
are also more reluctant to "lend" finance on the most
speculative ventures. I believe this principle
reflects Social Credit Philosophy more accurately than
the present International banking system.
May I again respectfully point out that if you are
going to use historical data to support an argument
that data should be accurate, otherwise you cast doubt
upon your own argument. Your comments, with due
respect, lack cohesion and logical balance. I trust
you will amplify them more fully, putting your
argument forwards in a more comprehensible manner.
respectfully yours
Bill McGunnigle
----- Original Message -----
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
In point of clarification, Jeff, the comments to which
you were replying were mine, not Chris Cook's.
In answer to your question, yes, I believe that
"Islamic banking and other non-Western monetary
systems are 'more crudely' or 'less' 'developed' than
those of the Western world."
It is not the only explanation but certainly a major
explanation for the ascendancy of the West. And it is
also a major explanation for its continued ascendancy.
There are other technologies that first developed in
the West that were significant.
For example, the navigational technology that enabled
Europeans to travel across the open ocean from point A
to point B, then return to point A, then to return to
point B--was possessed only by Europeans when Columbus
"discovered" America. The technology is what made
possible trade routes across the open ocean, without
which they would have been impossible. Indeed, it is
the reason we may justifiably say that Columbus in
fact discovered America.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"The only remaining plausible explanation is that the
great differences in the wealth of nations are mainly
due to differences in the quality of their
institutions and economic policies."
Excerpted from a paper available on the Internet:-
------
"From a political economy point of view, it has been
forcefully argued by Mancur Olsen and Douglas North
that it is the lack of efficient institutions that
explains why so many countries remain poor, despite
growth in the world economy. Without efficient
institutions, agents can usually not produce public
goods and the transactions costs in economic exchange
can become detrimental to economic growth. Buying
private protection to protect ones property rights is
usually both expensive and an uncertain investment
(North 1990; Olson 1996). To quote Mancur Olsen's last
published article:
'...the large differences in per capita income across
countries cannot be explained by differences in access
to the world's stock of productive knowledge or to its
capital markets, by differences in the ratio of the
population to land or natural resources, or by
differences in the quality of marketable human capital
or personal culture. Albeit at a high level of
aggregation, this eliminates each of the factors of
production as possible explanation of most of the
international differences in per capita income. The
only remaining plausible explanation is that the great
differences in the wealth of nations are mainly due to
differences in the quality of their institutions and
economic policies'"
-
--- jeff mascornick <jjm4114@yahoo.com> wrote:
Chris (and all):
Is it not a socially constructed value judgement to
say that Islamic banking and other non-Western
monetary systems are "more crudely" or "less"
"developed" than those of the Western world? - I find
Graeme's comment that - if we give primacy to the
efficacy of the western monetary system it does
suggest that many "more crudely" or "less" "developed"
societies NATURALLY become phased out (collatoral
damage, as Graeme eloquently put it) because they are
not as efficient our own - to be very interesting. -
Do you (Chris) believe this? Certainly you have every
right to believe this if you choose and you certainly
aren't alone - I simply wanted to clarify this and to
ask you to elaborate further on this statement. (P.S.
Believe me, I am not "picking a fight" here at all -
I'm interested to hear your response [or anyone else
who would like to]).
Jeff
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
|
Reply to this message