| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Bryan W. Monahan | | Date: | Friday, April 20, 2007 14:26:38 (-0400) | | From: | Keith Wilde <keithwilde @.........ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4712 (written by william_b_ryan) |
Thanks. This illuminates a corner that has long puzzled me. And it
made me think of a book I read a long time ago: "The Dreams of Reason",
by Rene Dubos. Subtitle, "Science and Utopias".
Keith
william_b_ryan@yahoo.com wrote:
>The following is excerpted from Bryan W. Monahan's
>1947 book, *An introduction to Social Credit*, which
>was graciously sent to me by Victor Bridger. Monahan
>was, I believe, the third chairman of the Social
>Credit Secretariat, following Dr. Tudor Jones, who had
>been deputy chairman under C. H. Douglas.
>---------------------------------
>
>
>It is now possible to see the practical basis of the
>proper limitation of Government to its legitimate
>functions.
>
>We have already seen that the power to contract-out is
>an essential aspect of genuine democracy. But, apart
>from suicide, it is impossible, or nearly impossible,
>to contract-out of Society. Consequently, it is
>absolutely essential to protect the individual with
>"_the equivalent of a Bill of Rights ultra vires of
>parliament, together with a permanent professional
>body, trained to attack not only an existing law, but
>armed with permanent power to bring out into the open
>for cross-examination at any time the originators of
>any law which encroaches on these rights..._
>
>"One of the first results of such an arrangement would
>be an arrest in the flow of law-making. If the world
>is regarded as a factory run by officials on would-be
>mass-production lines, continuous works-orders
>camouflaged as laws are inevitable, though quite
>rapidly fatal. But, in a world in which it is
>realised that the more action is spontaneous within
>the limits of personal sovereignty the less the
>friction and the higher the general satisfaction, they
>are both redundant and objectionable." (C. H. Douglas:
>*The Brief for the Prosecution*)
>
>Such a Bill of Rights provides an area of personal
>sovereignty into which the individual can withdraw,
>and out of which he can emerge into functional
>activities of his choice, in which he subordinates
>himself to the necessities of functional organisation.
> This is like the club member who elects to play in
>some particular game.
>
>Next, the individual must derive his income "from
>outside," so to speak, and contribute money to such
>organisations, including Government, as he desires to
>support.
>
>That is to say, _the Government should have no access
>to the general credit of the community except through
>independent citizens._ It should have no powers of
>taxation except the power to collect "subscriptions"
>as agreed to by citizens acting through their
>Representatives in Parliament.
>
>Again, we see that the nationalisation of banking is
>exactly the wrong thing, since it gives the Government
>direct access to the general credit.
>
>Once the idea of the Government as the "Big Boss" is
>cleared away, it is much easier to discern its
>legitimate functions.
>
>Perhaps the first of these functions is that of
>maintaining the rights of the individual by providing
>for the proper mechanisms for the administration of
>Justice--again, a reversal of the present usurpation
>of the functions of the Courts of Law by the
>"administrative lawlessness" of the bureaucracy.
>
>Secondly, the Government has a function as a General
>Committee of Society.
>
>And thirdly, it has a function as a Board of
>Directors.
>
>It is legitimate for the Government (Cabinet) to
>propose to Parliament (the Representatives of the
>Shareholders) general expenditure to enhance the
>general real credit. It is the function of Parliament
>to authorise or to refuse such expenditure.
>
>It is legitimate for the Government to recommend the
>rate of dividend distribution, on the basis of
>properly kept accounts relating to the affairs of
>Society. (For example, the plant and resources of the
>community can be "valued" as capital assets, and this
>gives an approximation to the real credit of the
>community if the various factors are properly taken
>into account. This figure can be given a "capital"
>value in monetary terms, and a "rate of dividend," for
>example, 5% or 10%, declared. This provides a general
>income, to be allocated as between general individual
>dividends to citizens, wages and salaries, and
>subsidies to adjust prices to the physical facts. The
>money required for government purposes must be
>contributed out of the _distributed_ money in the way
>as the funds of a club are derived from the
>subscriptions of its members.)
>
>To give effect to these general relationships, there
>needs to be a credit-issuing organisation with a
>constitutional status equivalent to that of, say, the
>Auditor-General. To this organisation would fall the
>keeping of the national accounts, and the computation
>of the price factor; and it might quite suitably be
>the organisation through which the national dividend
>was distributed, the price-subsidy adjusted, and the
>financing of production initiated.
>
>In principle, and potentially, most of the
>organisations necessary to implement genuine democracy
>exist, and there is no difficulty in adapting these
>organisations to their proper functions.
>
>__________________________________________________
>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 keithwilde@sympatico.ca
>For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
>
>
>
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message