|
Very interesting! The implication for Douglas
that Ryan notes is paralleled by the "creditary" theory developed by Meakin and
Gardiner--both of which I have found to be very persuasive. On the other
hand, the point made by McGunn. is reinforced in the work of Alexander Del
Mar. In particular, I have his 1896 book History of Monetary
Systems which is primarily a history of coinage that emphasizes the
consistency over time of particular coins and their direct link to a recognized
political authority. A notable example is a gold coin (solidus?)
that was the standard of value throughout Europe until the fall of
Constantinople. From the introductory notes to my 1983 re-issue
of his book, it is evident that Del Mar was a justifiably recognized
authority on the history of the precious metals and of coinage. This one is the
last of his books on the subject, which number six in total--plus many
articles. So, there was plenty of quite recent scholarship to the contrary
that Innes could have used.
I just happened to have the Del Mar book
on my shelves when starting to read Zarlenga's Lost Science of Money,
having spotted it in the window of a used book store not many months
previously. I read it in conjunction, and found that Stephen made very
extensive use of Del Mar, resting much of his argument on the work of the
latter. Although there seems to have been a perception of common
interest between Zarlenga and Meakin-Gardiner while the former's work was
in progress, publication and review shattered it, for they found that they
were not on the same track at all. Ryan's observation about Douglas and Innes is
reinforcement of the point.
There is interesting anecdotal linkage here to the
element of what Ryan calls fascism in proposals for monetary reform like those
of Zarlenga. The reissue of the Del Mar book that I have was an
intiative of The National Poetry Foundation, University of Maine at
Orono, in The Ezra Pound Scholarship Series. Pound was imprisoned for
many years by the United States because of his support for ideals of the
Mussolini regime in Italy. He was visited frequently in prison by Eustace
Mullins, a youthful admirer who researched the origins of the Federal Reserve
System as a staff member at the Library of Congress. This was published in
1952, and the copy I have was re-issued in 1954 as The Federal Reserve
Conspiracy. It was put into my hands by the former leader of the
Social Credit Party of Canada, John Blackmore, but I had never read it until I
found that Zarlenga was basing much of his argument upon it. At the time
he published the book, Mullins was also serving as chief of research for the
Unamerican Activities campaign of Joseph McCarthy. This link led me to
review a lot of conspiracy literature, some of which I had read and
discounted long in the past. As I passed on these bits of info to Stephen,
he became upset with me and accused me of wanting to destroy his position, which
was not the case.
(I have read the subsequent exchanges under
this head, those between Martin and Ryan, and the substantial essay by
McGunn. of this morning. This seemed like the most appropriate place to
insert my own comment.)
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Historic
accuracy?
> Then I take it you do not agree with this from Innes'
> 1913
paper
> http://www.geocities.com/new_economics/innes
>
> "...there is overwhelming evidence that there
never
> was a monetary unit which depended on the value of
> coin or
on a weight of metal; that there never was,
> until quite modern days, any
fixed relationship
> between the monetary unit and any metal; that,
in
> fact, there never was such a thing as a metallic
> standard of
value."
> ------------------
>
> Here's the thing.
Douglas' theory makes no sense
> whatsoever from the orthodox money is a
medium of
> exchange perspective. His theory makes perfect
sense
> from the creditary perspective expressed by Innes.
>
>
> --- William Hugh McGunnigle <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>
>
wrote:
>
> With due respect the Innes papers were designed to
try
> to demonstrate that there was no control of coinage in
> the
dark ages. They ignored to a large extent the fact
> that monarchs used
the "tally stick" to keep track of
> finances and these were used for "tax
assessment".
> Coin value was related to these. I therefore stand
by
> my previous statement that, although it appeared that
> coinage
was not really under control there was a rigid
> value system related to
weight of Gold, Silver and
> Copper metal in coins. The methods of
assessing coin
> purity had been established long before the advent
of
> the Roman Empire by Archmeides of Greece. Although it
>
appeared crude by modern methods of assey it was still
> adequate for
practical purposes. Contrary to popular
> belief the men who did this type
of assey work were
> skilled and generally honest because they
were
> appointed by Royal decree. The penalty for incorrect
> assey
was death. Innes work, while skilled and
> undoubtedly honestly conducted,
suffered from an
> obvious bias. He was selective in his choice of
>
primary sources and tended to ignore sources that
> contradicted his basic
premises. In all fairness he is
> not the only historian to do this, but
he is open to
> strong critisism because of it. I personally
cannot
> condemn him as a charletan he was too good an
> historian
for that, but do regard his work with a
> great deal of reserve. You are
however correct in
> quoting his work as a valid source of contradiction
to
> my own research.
>
> W.H.McGunnigle
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
>
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> with the Yahoo! Search movie
showtime shortcut.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
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 keithwilde@sympatico.ca
> For
more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> |
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
