| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] debt is simply a financial tool | | Date: | Saturday, June 2, 2007 09:14:22 (-0400) | | From: | Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4833 (written by Wallace Klinck) |
Hi Wally,
Thanks for an excellent post on the 'failings' of 'political Party' Social
Credit here and in Alberta, and on the subject heading..
If I might elaborate a little more on the experience in BC. You wrote:-
"The B. C.
"Social Credit" Government gave miniscule lip-service to Social Credit but
appeared to either know, or care, little about genuine Social Credit
policy. Perhaps they thought it was just a pipe-
dream? But perhaps a useful one for getting electoral support?"
I don't believe there WAS any widespread understanding of 'genuine' Social
Credit policy here at that time, (1952). Though doubtless some of the long
time, more 'genuine' Social Crediters running for office tried to engender
some.
Since several, including, I believe, the ''campaign Leader'', Alberta
'import' Rev. Hansell, were long time 'Douglasites.' Nearly all of those
people failed to win election in the ridings they sought to represent,
however. Though many did stay active in the background of BC Social Credit
for a long time afterwards.
Amongst the bulk of those running for office, and their supporters, "Social
Credit" was seen, and often 'sold', more as a way to get 'interest-free'
money, primarily for Government, than 'debt-free' money for consumers.
Mostly though, because we had a 'single transferable ballot' in that
election, the Socreds got in because they were most people's, including the
'socialists', second choice. And there was no clear 'first choice' winner.
In the minds of those running, and the public voting, as in the minds of
many 'political Party' Socreds today here and in other countries, "interest"
was the great evil.
This was why Bennett made such a big thing of his Government's move to
''stop borrowing''. To ''free the Government from the clutches of the
rapacious Bankers". To ''balance the budget", or, if possible, run a
'surplus' to build up the bank account, and save on paying further 'usury'.
That was the perception of "Social Credit" created, and one that's long
endured. Even amongst the present followers of the now miniscule BC Social
Credit "Party".
It was, however, also a fair bit more complicated than that. BC Social
Credit, unlike in Alberta, was not elected initially, nor in any of the
elections subsequently over its first 20 years in power, with a commanding
majority of the popular vote.
To seek a 'mandate' based on a conception that few understood, and those
that did had failed to adequately convey to the electorate, or alternately,
that electorate had 'rejected', would've been political suicide.
The 'public' didn't overhwelmingly embrace the idea here, even the
'distorted' version Bennett offered, because, I believe, the 'culture' and
background of the Province is far different from that of Alberta.
'Socialism' was far deeper rooted here, and there was a widespread belief
that the "government" should "do things for you". Rather than enabling you
to "do things for yourself."
While Alberta got the "Populists" as the American frontier closed, we got
the "Socialists" from western Montana and the Idaho panhandle mining
regions. Then very definitely the 'hotbeds' of American radical Labour.
Couple that with the 'British' working-class 'Labour' types who manned much
of the industry in the larger Coastal cities, a dose of eastern European
'anarchists', and others from Scandinavia and Germany who had experience
with 'socialist' movements in those countries, and put them all into what's
been described often as the "Company" Province, (since much of our industry
here was very capital intensive, even early on), and you didn't exactly get
the most 'favourable' seedbed for Social Credit.
Even a dedicated, 'genuine' Social Credit administration would've had
problems in a situation like that. The great failing, in my opinion, was
not in the way Bennett governed. He gave the people largely what they
wanted. And delivered it very efficiently. "That is moral which works
best."
But he either forgot, or never really knew, after his administration had
achieved a high level of Provincial development, just how to effectively
deal with 'inflation'. At that juncture, a more 'genuine' Social Credit
might well have been 'politically' saleable. Especially since there was a
widespread dislike of the Federal government prevalent here at that time.
Why he didn't attempt to go that way, I could only speculate. And my guess
is he was getting old, and despite his 'financial' innovativeness, couldn't
ever make a complete break from 'orthodoxy'.
Joe
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message