Greetings all. First, let's face it. Douglas got frustrated later in life and became anti-semitic in some of his writings. The fact that about 60% of Britons then would have agreed with him then has been overlooked. It was fashionable. But we now have to live with it. It was an error on my part to mention it in passing.
Helge, what you state is right on the button. Except that, while those who control money can also control the media, we will not get unbiassed media. When SC first went political in NZ we had to get a lawyer member to demand that our main and best newspaper accept a paid advertisement from us! I believe wartime regulations about subversive movements were cited. Our TV are the worst here, regularly running distorted and misleading material regarding monetary affairs. I presently have a formal complaint in with our Complaints Authority on one programme, and although I have given cast-iron proof that the two main points in the programme (one that banks lend money deposited with them) are wrong, it is most unlikely that it will succeed.
Joe, apologies for slightly excessive bluntness, but perhaps it stirred the debate along a bit. But you still appear confused between money issued as a debt that gets cancelled out of existence, leaving the debt, and debt-free money issued so that when the same thing happens to it it leaves no debt behind. Yet you tacitly advocate the latter for a Dividend etc.
I believe our political approach has had its annual hammering, so can we please have a look at the alternative? I'll number some points so that others can quote any where they disagree without repeating the text. 1. Some ruling body has to legislate S C proposals into reality, and,
1a. steer the programme into the right direction.
2. (Step by step, please.) How will this be achieved?
2b. (Optional!) What has the particular correspondent done to try to achieve this aim, and how far was progress made?
3. Since we can not know what is practicable until we have "proper national accounts", the first step must be establishmentof an independent National Credit Authority to prepare one. How can this be made totally independent and still forced to follow SC principles?
3a. In a constitutional monarchy, it could be separated to some extent from political control by coming under the Crown, like the judiciary. But these days Governors General are political appointees. As are Attorneys General. Is there a problem there? Do nations without this freak constitution have an even worse problem?
4. Will the Credit Authority create money, or authorise some other body, treasury ior central bank, to do so?
4a. Will it or government decide how the money is to be spent?
5. How will any nation repay its debt, internal and external?
That's probably plenty for a while.
Regards.
John R.
From: thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:03:40 -0800
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Looking For Info
I wouldn't disagree with any of that, Helge. Any discussion of whether Social Credit is "anti-semitic" or not is apt to be rather fruitless, however. Since that catch-phrase, like many others of a similar ilk, is never clearly defined.
It is as nebulous as others that have crept into the lexicon of catch-phrases in recent years. Ones in Canada like "distinct-society", or "aboriginal title", or "sovereingty-association". Or my favourite, since it's so often used in conjunction with the lumber industry here in BC, "value-added". Try and get a concise definition on that one from any of those who are always beating their gums in advocacy of it, and all the wonders it supposedly will bring! And if I were to give one definition, what I believe is the only correct one, how many of those calling for "'value-added" would agree with me.
And so it is with "anti-semitism". It, like those others, means different things to different people, and trying to defend Social Credit itself against such a charge is likely to be an exercise in futility unless those making the charge first define clearly what they take that term to mean.
Interestingly, those who would make such a charge always seem reluctant to do just that. Perhaps they realize that just because one "philosophy" is incompatible with another, this certainly does not mean any hatred need be inherent in either. Of course if the policy of one philosophy embodies "live, and let live", while the other posits, "you'll live just as we tell you to live, or we'll make it impossible for you to live at all", we might have a problem.
Regards,
Joe
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 9:04 PM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] Looking For Info
It is unfortunate that a link appears to have been established, in the popular mind, between Social Credit and anti-semitism. That gives the bankers a tool to divide and conquer the movement, which is what seems to have happened here in Alberta during the days of the provincial Socred government.
The power of the state should be a concern for all citizens, irrespective of the kind of government elected into office.
The best way of keeping a government honest is to have a healthy democracy where citizens take an active part in decision making by their government. And that requires an unbiased press corps and an impartial judicial system.
Money has a strange way of infiltrating all of these in a corrosive way, as evidenced by what is happening around us at this time.
Ideas which may seem to be "heretical" at first glance, in the field of economics, as in other areas of intellectual endeavour, may be deserving of a second look and further consideration before being discarded. (Remember Copernicus, Galileo and the Roman Catholic Church).
I agree with Per that we shall have to adapt to the present time and circumstances without backing away from the belief that the wealth of nations belong to the people who make up those nations, rather than the bankers who are merely the managers of that wealth, not the owners that they pretend to be.
Regards,
Helge Nome
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:56:02 +0100
> From: almgren_per@telia.com
> To: socialcredit@elistas.com
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Looking For Info
>
> Joe Thomson skrev:
> > (John Rawson wrote:-) Yes, Joe, the money was issued, not lent into
> > circulation. And yes, we did lead the world out of the slump. Along,
> > of course, with Nazi Germany, which used similar methods to build
> > autobahns etc. which unfortunate coincidence gives our opponents a
> > chance to link us further with anti-semitism.
> >
> > (Joe replies:-) Linking "us further with anti-semitism" would be the
> > least of my concerns over this method of approach, John. You may not
> > be aware of it, but what you are proposing is the building of a
> > totalitarian "slave state", not a one in which "individual" freedom
> > will be allowed to develop and flourish. That the "slaves" will be
> > well fed and quartered, while they're needed, is of little
> > consequence. They're still "slaves", beholden for their continued
> > sustenance to "servitude" to the "State" and the "system" it imposes
> > on them.
> In my opinion this writing of "slave state" is not what John describes.
> My impression now is that there is to much arguing of what Douglas have
> expressed in a special situation in this list and I think that if Social
> Credit should be of any use in the future, it must be allowed to adjust
> to realities of to-day. If no new thinking is accepted, there is not
> much use to discuss, it would just be a seminar of history, not a forum
> for promoting useful ideas for practical use in the society.
> >
> > This is the very antithesis of "Social Credit". It is "Fascism"
> > without the more odious facets of that failed system fully revealing
> > themselves. Which they soon would, if ever it were imposed. It is
> > interesting that we have been duped into calling this 'anti-semitism'
> > considering where such a policy likely originated.
> This could not be called Fascism in the common meaning of the word.
>
> Per Almgren
> >
> > (John continues:-) And, of course, your argument that new money has to
> > be repaid means that any used for the National Dividend etc. would be
> > in the same category, which is ridiculous.
> >
> > (Joe replies:-) It is "repaid", John. It cancels that portion of
> > /existing/ debt charges that could not otherwise be repaid. Without
> > creating ANOTHER debt charge in the process. It is an "accounting
> > adjustment" carried out in the economy as a whole to more fully allow
> > the overall costs of production to be FINANCIALLY, as well as
> > 'physically', self-liquidating with consumption.
> >
> >
> > (John continues:-) An independent Credit Authority would assess how
> > much new money needed to be put into circulation during the ensuing
> > period without causing demand inflation. What that money was to be
> > used for would be a political decision, even if it only considered a
> > divarication between discount funds and those for a dividend. Or
> > reducing taxation.
> >
> > (Joe replies:-) I can generally agree with that provided it be
> > realized this "new money" is applied to reducing prices to Consumers
> > FIRST, not to funding other things which have additional "costs".
> >
> > Regards,
> > Joe
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* John G Rawson <mailto:johngrawson@hotmail.com>
> > *To:* Socred elistas <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
> > *Sent:* Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:07 PM
> > *Subject:* RE: [socialcredit] Looking For Info
> >
> > For the first parts, you have valid points. I have never debated
> > whether or not some form of price control might be necessary. But
> > based on the rather inane information that had previously been
> > circulated, I could not see how this particular mechanism could be
> > practicable. Your new information at least clears part of that
> > objection.
> > Yes, Joe, the money was issued, not lent into circulation. And
> > yes, we did lead the world out of the slump. Along, of course,
> > with Nazi Germany, which used similar methods to build autobahns
> > etc. which unfortunate coincidence gives our opponents a chance to
> > link us further with anti-semitism.
> > And, of course, your argument that new money has to be repaid
> > means that any used for the National Dividend etc. would be in the
> > same category, which is ridiculous. An independent Credit
> > Authority would assess how much new money needed to be put into
> > circulation during the ensuing period without causing demand
> > inflation. What that money was to be used for would be a political
> > decision, even if it only considered a divarication between
> > discount funds and those for a dividend. Or reducing taxation.
> > The Ottawa agreement did nothing to increase trade or spending
> > power. All it did was to close shop against other nations. And
> > one of its minor sidelines was to force us to buy useless strains
> > of forest seed from you rather than the USA. The Douglas fir
> > appeared to have come from somewhere inside the arctic circle,
> > because the lengtrh of day effect made it bud burst far too early
> > in the spring so that it got frost-burned in our much milder
> > climate in the central Nth. Is. Then it hardened off about
> > Christmas and ceased growing through all the warm summer and
> > autumn period. I remember a compartment in Kaingaroa Forest
> > planted with both this strain and a normal one from Washington or
> > wherever. The boundary looked like a sudden cliff face as the
> > canopy dropped from one to the other.The only point I was making
> > over food subsidies was that we had a humanitarian government that
> > helped both public health and a major industry by the use of
> > debt-free credit. Rooseveldt's New Deal did something the same
> > thing on borrowed money. War expenditure finallly brought us right
> > out, and as a point of interest NZ (with strict import controls)
> > came out of the war with zero overseas debt. (And a bureaucracy
> > subsidised less healthy white floured bread, not wholemeal!)
> > But the government didn't "have to" subsidise food. People were
> > starving and it used one method to help them. Coming from a
> > (broke, ex-serviceman's) farm, I never went hungry. But I knew men
> > my age whose developmenmt was stunted for that reason.
> > It seems we may have to revisit times like that before enough
> > people will again consider monetary reform. in any shape, SC or other.
> >
> > John R.
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 helgenome@hotmail.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Share your holiday memories for free with Windows LiveT Photos. Get started now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
MSN NZ Travel Get inspired - dream, research, plan and book your next holiday online |
RE: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
