|
Hi Bill:
I apologize if my quote from the man who invented
Social Credit is not "scholarly" enough for this discussion. Joe asked a
specific question, and I pulled a quote from Douglas which gave a specific
answer to his query. The fact that you have an opinion pertaining
to the quote which I, and many other Social Crediters, happen to disagree
with does not make the quote itself "unscholarly"
If you look at the last paragraph of the quote, you
will find Douglas' reasoning for calling banking practices
"fraudulent":
"Any person or any organization who can create
practically at will sums of money equivalent to the price values of all the
goods produced by the community is the virtual owner of those goods, and,
therefore, the claim of the banking system to the ownership of the money which
it creates is a claim to the ownership of the country."
The fact Douglas deemed this aspect of banking
practices to be "fraudulent" does not mean that he wanted to eliminate
fractional reserve banking, nor to change their administration through
the policy of nationalization. However; I believe there is no doubt that
he wanted the National Credit Authority to control the policy of banking, and I
think the idea that Major Douglas had some "love affair" with the banking system
is completely fictitious. He simply refused "to throw the baby out with
the bath water."
Take care,
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:26
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of
Social Credit
> Jim, we are trying to have a scholarly discussion
>
here. By contrast, the quotation from Douglas is
> pulled from a
speech during an electoral campaign, in
> which rather strong rhetoric was
utilized, in the
> midst of a Great Depression in which people had
every
> reason to be unhappy with the situation. Douglas was
>
attempting to rally support to his cause with appeals
> to
emotion.
>
> But look at what he actually does, or rather, does
not
> say. He does not call for the abolition of the
>
fractional reserve system. He does not call for the
>
nationalization of banks.
>
> He does call for the imposition of
controls over
> banking, in which he specifically calls for
crediting
> the public's account for the profits of banking
>
remaining after the payment of the six percent
> dividend on subscribed
capital, and for the value of
> their assets over and above that showed on
their
> balance sheets. This credit would be in offset to
>
debt owed to the banks.
>
> Notice that he says that the essence of
the fraud was
> their claim to the ownership of the nation's
money,
> which means that they had the right, in their minds,
> to
determine policy, which at that point had brought
> on the Great
Depression, with no end in sight.
>
> I would prefer that banking
be regulated as if it were
> a public utility.
>
-----------------------------
>
> By the way, beyond the short
citations in this
> address, I have not seen Douglas' "suggestions"
to
> "the New Zealand Government at the Monetary Commission
> in
1934." Surely there are more complete transcripts
> of what Douglas
presented in the public record
> somewhere.
>
>
> ---
Jim <jschroeder@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi Joe:
>
> You state below:
>
> "Rather I've
come to think it's often used to create a
> sense of revulsion at what the
bank is doing. As if
> it's engaging in something
'fraudulent'."
>
> But if we are operating under a purely
'creditary'
> system now, is there anything 'fraudulent' in what
the
> bank does?"
>
> Douglas answers your question in
"Dictatorship by
> Taxation":
>
--------------------------------
>
> "The essence of the fraud is
the claim that the money
> that they create is their own money, and the
fraud
> differs in no respect in quality but only in its far
>
greater magnitude, from the fraud of counterfeiting.
>
> "At the
instigation of the banking system, barbarously
> severe penalties are
imposed upon the counterfeiter of
> a ten-shilling note, but a peerage is
conferred upon
> the counterfeiter by banking methods of sums
running
> into hundreds of millions.
>
> "May I make this
point clear beyond all doubt? It is
> the claim to the ownership of money
which is the core
> of the matter. Any person or any organization who
can
> create practically at will sums of money equivalent to
> the
price values of all the goods produced by the
> community is the virtual
owner of those goods, and,
> therefore, the claim of the banking system to
the
> ownership of the money which it creates is a claim to
> the
ownership of the country."
>
> http://www.alor.org/Library/Dictatorshipbytaxation.htm#1a
>
> Take care,
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
>
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
> in the Yahoo! Answers Food &
Drink Q&A.
> http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
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 jschroeder@shaw.ca
> For more
information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> |
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
