| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Joe's Question | | Date: | Sunday, December 9, 2007 22:50:21 (-0500) | | From: | Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 5130 (written by Martin Hattersley) |
(Martin wrote:-) ".... getting anyone
on the inside of the banking system to listen to Social Credit explanations
will be almost impossible."
".... the situation
might be saved by a small band of people who "know what to do and how to do
it."
-------------------------------------------------
(Joe replies:-) I can't discount any of what you've said, Martin, but this
might beg the question of just "WHO?", if not 'Bankers', that particular
"small band of people" is really going to be?
It seems to me that this is a lot like the idea that many people have when
they want to run for elected office. They believe 'they' can actually 'do'
something, if only they can win election.
But experience seems to indicate that no matter how 'well intentioned' they
be ~ and generally they are very well endowed with the best of intentions, I
think, or they wouldn't make the effort ~ once they get the office sought
they find understanding just "what to do and how to do it" in the face of
actual realities is something far different than just talking about it.
I don't think we can ignore what Douglas said about 'second-rate experts'
trying to instruct 'first-rate experts' in technical matters of which those
latter 'experts' already have all the experience, and the former none. And
especially in some type of financial crisis. The 'technique' of a very
involved and inter-connected area like 'banking' is really something for the
experienced, not the amateur.
So it may well pay us to make every effort to try to get someone on the
'inside' onside. It surely must dawn on someone there, I think, that any
set-up based on pure speculation is self-defeating, no matter how attractive
the allure of possessing larger 'figures' might be.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Hattersley" <jmartinh@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Joe's Question
> It would seem to me, that when fortunes in the billions can be made by
> currency and commodity speculation financed by bank credit, getting
anyone
> on the inside of the banking system to listen to Social Credit
explanations
> will be almost impossible.
>
> The only thing that I think could do this would be outright terror in the
> banking fraternity at the prospect of complete economic collapse. I think
> Douglas foresaw the time when this might happen, and where the situation
> might be saved by a small band of people who "know what to do and how to
do
> it." Perhaps someone on the list (?Wally) would be able to cite the exact
> quotation.
>
> Martin Hattersley, 5929-189 St.,
> EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
> Phone (780) 483-5442
> e-mail <jmartinh@shaw.ca>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 7:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Joe's Question
>
>
>
> " I think it is a mistake to assume that the bankers
> understand the Douglas theory. Very few Social
> Crediters have understood the theory. It is difficult and subtle." ~
Bill
> Ryan
> >
> "One of the barons of Bay Street, Sir John
> Aird, was reduced to pleading the "we do not want theories introduced into
> banking. If you get into theories you are on dangerous ground." ~
excerpted
> from "Chapter Three: William Irvine
> and the Farmers in Politics"
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> (Joe asks:-) I wonder, would the attitude amongst bankers today likely
be
> the same as that expressed by Aird above?
>
> Or would today's top bankers be more receptive to 'theories', (maybe
> especially right now!), than they were then. And the Douglas theory in
> particular if it were put forth in a less "difficult and subtle", but
still
> correct, manner than Douglas managed to do?
>
> If it were put to them ~ if it could be ~ in such a manner that it
couldn't
> help but be properly understood, and they still rejected it, might this
not
> put them in a spot where they'd clearly have to explain 'why'?
>
> What if that 'why' turns out to be the same reason given by Sidney Webb
when
> Douglas explained his scheme to him and answered every 'technical'
> objection? Only to be told the 'soundness' didn't matter, "....it's its
> object I don't like."?
>
> Well, I for one sure hope it could be put to them in such a manner, and
> attitudes have changed.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 jmartinh@shaw.ca
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1178 - Release Date:
08/12/2007
> 11:59 AM
>
>
>
> --
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 19194 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message