To
hell with Rothschild International Usury
-- Feder, Gesell, Kitson, Douglas and Farrakhan
-- economic salvation ours for the taking
"Neither let us
be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us,
nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction to the
Government nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith
that right makes might, and in that faith let us, to the
end, dare to do our duty as we understand it." -- Abraham
Lincoln, February 27, 1860
Dick
Eastman
Yakima,
Washington
Every man
is responsible to every other man
"If a nation expects to be
ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects
what never was and never will be." -- Jefferson, letter to
Col. Yancey, January 6, 1816
"Shall we gather strength
by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the
means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our
backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until
our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we
are not weak, if we make proper use of the means which
the God of nature hath placed in our power. . . .
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles along.
There is a just God who presides over the destinies of
nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our
battles with us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong
alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. . .
it is not too late to retire from the contest. There is
no retreat, but in submission and slavery! Our chains
are forged! Their clanking may be heard. . . . Why
stand we here idle? . . . Is life so dear, or peace so
sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what
course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty
or give me death!"
--
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
"A nation can survive its
fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason
from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for
he is known and he carries his banners openly against the
city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates
freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys,
heard in the very halls of government itself. For the
traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents
familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their
garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in
the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he
works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the
pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it
can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The
traitor is the carrier of the plague.
-- Cicero, addressed to
the Roman Senate, as recorded by Sallust
(1) nationalization of banks and the issuance of debt-free
money;
(2) institution of a monetary work standard;
(3) creation of a debt-free, non-inflationary system of public
works;
(4) establishment of a defined economic border; and
(5) barter in international trade.

Gottfried Feder created
the goal of "Brechung der
Zinsknechtschaft" (Destruction of Interest Slavery) which
took Hitler rode to power -- only to betray in exchange for the
backing of industrialists controlled by bankers.
In 1932 Gottfried Feder wrote:
THE INDUSTRIAL
CAPITAL OF ALL OF
GERMAN INDUSTRY AMOUNTS TO
LESS THAN 12 BILLION !
Understand this
clearly ! In all areas, in
our iron and coal industry, clothing and textiles, stone and
earth, mining and shipping, wood and glass, in our construction
industry, in the gigantic chemical factories, in our formerly
internationally dominant electrical industry, in our machine and
locomotive factories, dockyards and paper factories,
transportation and food industries ; short and sweet, in the
infinitely broad area of all our industries—again, all our
industries—we find not even 12 billion !
Reckoned on the basis of the
splendid situation before the war ! But even at that time
THE HOUSE OF
ROTHSCHILD ALONE POSSESSED
40 BILLION !
And what might
it possess today after the gigantic interest that the war
brought its way ! You could gather together all the farmers of
the entire world and their total cash assets would not approach
the 40 billion of the one family of Rothschilds.
But we have a
great number of such “Rothschilds.” The Mendelssohns, the
Bleichröders, the Friedländers, the Warburgs, to name only a few
of the most important. And even if none of these equals its
gigantic model each has more money to waste than all our
outspoken farmers together ! Yet in spite of this it is
precisely the landowners whom our “saviors of the people” brand
as the worst, even the only, exploiters, while the true vampire
is never mentioned even in a whisper. We are intentionally
diverted to the far lesser evil so that we will not see the
greatest evil, all-consuming loan capital . And this is the way
it’s been done from Marx and Lassalle up to Levien, Landauer and
Mühsam . Haven’t you opened your eyes yet ? ...
"Dick, the US
and its praised economical system have created a bankrupt nation
with unimaginable depths of several trillions of Dollars to this
day.
The US is bankrupt and present day Germany as satellite of USA
is bankrupt, too The German-quisling- governments starting 1947
have created a national dept of 1.5 trillion! One trillion is a
one and twelve zeros = thirteen digits!"
"Liberty is the basis; and
whoever would dare sap the foundations, or overturn the
structure, under whatever specious pretext he may attempt
it, will merit the bitterest execration, and the severest
punishment, which can be inflicted by his injured country."
-- George
Washington, June 8, 1783
Adolf Hitler met
him in summer 1919, and Feder became his mentor in finance and
economics. He was the inspirator of Hitler's opposition to
"Jewish finance capitalism."
Feder was born in Würzburg Germany
on 27 January 1883 as the son of civil servant Hans Feder and
Mathilde Feder (née Luz). After attending humanistic schools in
Ansbach and Munich, he studied engineering in Berlin
and Zürich (Switzerland); after graduating, he founded a
construction company in 1908 that subsequently was particularly
active in Bulgaria where it built a number of official
buildings.
From 1917 on, Feder studied financial politics and economics on
his own; he developed a hostility towards wealthy bankers during
World War I and wrote a "manifesto on breaking the shackles of
interest" ("Brechung der Zinsknechtschaft") in 1919. This was
soon followed by the founding of a "task force" dedicated to
those goals that demanded a nationalisation of all banks and an
abolition of interest.
In the same year, Feder, together with Anton Drexler, Dietrich
Eckart and Karl Harrer, was also involved in the founding of the
Deutsche Arbeiterpartei ("German worker's party", DAP), which
would later change its name to Nationalsozialistische Deutsche
Arbeiterpartei, more commonly known as the Nazi party.
After the Night of the Long Knives, where officials like Gregor
Strasser and Ernst Roehm were murdered, Feder began to withdraw
from the government, finally becoming a professor at the
Technische Hochschule in Berlin in December 1936, where he
stayed until his death in Murnau on September 24, 1941.

"We were not
foolish enough to try to make a currency coverage of gold of
which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we
required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done or goods
produced. . . .we laugh at the time our national financiers held
the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold
and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank." --Adolf
Hitler, 1937
In “The Social State,”
first published in Auf Gut Deutsch,
on May 24, 1919, Feder joined Eckart’s call for a new and better
revolution . He demanded the overthrow of domination by “the
golden international,” which he associated with the Entente
powers, and he proposed the establishment of a form of
government which woudl be democratic, highly centralized, and
corporatist without usury.

The Social State
Gottfried Feder
The old form of government has broken down .
What shall take its place ? This is the most important problem
of the future : Weimar’s democratic-parliamentary monster,
lifeless as it is, now that its illusionary policies have
completely collapsed, seems to have reached the end of its days
. The peace conditions of the Entente are the horrible alarm
bell which has dispelled Socialist dreams and illusions . Where
is Mr. Scheidemann’s peace with understanding ? Where is Mr.
Erzberger’s economic peace—guaranteed to be ready in half an
hour (!) Where is the League of Nations, where is Mr. Eisner’s
world revolution ? Where is the workers’ state in which
production is doubled; where is the higher morality — where is
any reconstruction at all to be seen ?
Weighed and found wanting—that is already the
judgement of its own people, of its own contemporaries . Over
and over again history will curse the German revolutionaries who
betrayed their people, who in their shortsighted megalomania
first robbed a brave people of belief in and desire for victory
and then with the cowardly bravery of the assassin stabbed the
army in the back during its most difficult days, in order to
seize the power which they cannot use . For it is one thing to
fell a swaying giant from behind to uproot a dynasty which has
already lost touch with the people, or to revolutionize a civil
service which has lost its vital connection with the life of the
people . It is quite a different thing to display revolutionary
power when the task is to inspire the mortally wounded people
with new vitality and to prepare a new and vigorous political
organism . Where is the revolutionary power of the German
revolutionaries ? Where is the French, the English, the Italian
revolution ? Where is the world revolution ? Messrs. Ebert,
Scheidemann, Erzberger, Eisner, Hoffman and whatever all their
names are have kept none of their promises, none whatsoever .
Why ? Because no new idea of state guides them, because they
think the new form of government should be, at best, class rule,
or worse : a system of parliamentary compromises ; because
they are so far from the true socialist state that they cannot
summon the courage to lay a hand on the capitalist system;
because they have not yet understood what the World War was
really all about, namely, that it was the final battle of the
international monetary powers for ultimate world domination .
It would be best to ask ourselves which of the
chief defects of the old state we should avoid I will enumerate
them :
The irresponsible (assertion of) divine right
by the Crown ; the tact that army and navy as well as the
higher civil service were dependent on the sovereign ruler .
Further, the wholly insufficient representation of the people in
the parliament which, completely tangled up in disgusting party
quarrels, lost any sense of the interests of the folk; a social
democracy which seemed to find its life work exclusively in
inciting the workers against their employers . These were
probably the most prominent defects in the political life of our
people before the collapse . It is, therefore, our most
important task to avoid these defects . The revolution has made
a clean sweep of the obvious abuses of the old form of
government—the irresponsible assertion of divine right, the
exaggerated and misdirected militarism and bureaucracy . But
the much more deeply imbedded defect, the whole hopeless
parliamentarianism, is growing vigorously and is beginning, if
the signs are not deceptive, to reach an understanding with the
forces of capitalism . Obviously,
the only deeper meaning of the revolution, that is, the
emancipation of labor from international economic enslavement by
the golden international, would thus be abolished and the
economic subjugation of creative labor by the interest slavery
of the mammonistic powers would be firmly established .
The new state must therefore make a radical
break with all the principles of western democracy . It must
especially break with parliamentary parties and parliamentary
cliques, and above all, it must not mix political and economic
types of popular representation in a single parliament, but must
provide for this basic separation by a two-chamber system .

"And it proved sound. It worked. In less than ten
years Germany became easily the most powerful state in Europe.
It worked so magically and magnificently that it sounded the
death knell of the entire (Zionist) Jewish money system. World
Jewry knew that they had to destroy Hitler's system, by whatever
means might prove necessary, or their own [system of usury]
would necessarily die. And if it died, with it must die their
dream and their hope of making themselves masters of the world.
The primary issue over which World War II was fought was to
determine which money system was to survive. At bottom it was
not a war between Germany and the so-called allies. Primarily it
was war to the death between Germany and the International Money
Power." --William Gayley
Simpson,
'Which Way Western Man'
(p.642)
Historical note: Hitler did not
live up to his mentor's populist expectations.
Propaganda cost money and this
was something that the Nazi Party was very short of. Whereas the
German Social Democrat Party was funded by the trade unions and
the pro-capitalist parties by industrialists, the NSDAP had to
rely on contributions from party members. When Hitler approached
rich industrialists for help he was told that his economic
policies (profit-sharing, nationalization of trusts) were too
left-wing.
In an attempt to obtain financial
contributions from industrialists, Hitler wrote a pamphlet in
1927 entitled The Road to
Resurgence. Only a small number of these pamphlets were
printed and they were only meant for the eyes of the top
industrialists in Germany. The reason that the pamphlet was kept
secret was that it contained information that would have upset
Hitler's working-class supporters. In the pamphlet Hitler
implied that the anti-capitalist measures included in the
original twenty-five points of the NSDAP programme would not be
implemented if he gained power.
Feder:
Our task is
therefore to examine exhaustively how it stands, then to enquire
scientifically whence it originated, and finally, with creative
inspiration, to answer the fateful question, what then? The high
aim of these pamphlets is to indicate new methods for the life
of the State, for finance and economics; to set on high a 'rocher
de bronze' in the midst of the chaos, to form a stock of clear
knowledge for close study, so that out of it all may emerge a
united political will.
At the great Meeting on August 31st, 1927, Adolf
Hitler declared emphatically: "Questions of Programme do not
affect the Council of Administration; the Programme is fixed,
and I shall never suffer changes in the principles of the
movement, as laid down in its Programme." With this decisive
pronouncement on the part of our Leader I associate myself
whole-heartedly, for nothing is more dangerous to the life and
striking force of a movement such as ours, than that, as time
goes on, its fixed Programme should be subjected to negative
criticism.
No man who feels that he cannot go the whole way
with us in the Jewish question, in our fight against high
finance, the Dawes Pact and the pauperising policy, or in any
other questions contained in our Programme, or is inclined to
barter the liberty of the German nation through the League of
Nations, the Locarno Pact, by compromise and cowardice, need
apply to us; his place is outside the N.S.D.A.P. We utterly
reject the 'superior private knowledge' which such as he are so
ready to air in platform oratory and journalistic out-pourings.
A man who agrees fundamentally with our
principles may perhaps have scruples about a few minor details,
for we cannot expect evergone to agree absolutely on all
questions, especially in an aggressive political movement.
It is, however, a different matter when political
enemies make mince meat of some one Point by odious
misrepresentation quite beside the point, as has indeed
happened. In such a case an official commentary is necessary.
(See Point 17.)
We refuse to vary our Programme for reasons of
expediency, as other parties do, to suit so-called altered
conditions. We intend to make conditions suit our Programme, by
mastering them.
I have been commissioned by Adolf Hitler to issue this series of
pamphlets, which are to form the official literature of the
Party.
I have included the official Manifesto of the
Party of March 6th 1930; also my reply to ten questions set us
by the Deutsche Tageszeitung, the leading organ of the
Reichlandbund. That newspaper accepted my replies.
This is the best and most effective way to
dispose of all the lies about our ill-disposition towards
ownership and inheritance of landed property in Germany.
Gottfried Feder
The Supreme
Court -- A Judicial Oligarchy serving the Money Power
The people who
from the days of Federalist John Marshall brought you the
Alien and Sedition Acts and Central Banking. About them
Abraham Lincoln warned in his First Inaugural Address:
"The candit
citizen must confess that if the policy of the government
upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be
irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the
instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties
in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their
own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their
government into the hands of the eminent tribunal."

Presented in Public Debate in Wagner Hall,
Munich,
11 April 1921
The German Federation for the Abolition of
Interest Slavery, hereinafter called “The Federation,” demands
the following:
1) We demand the nationwide discontinuation of interest
payments, which is nothing more than robbery of the nation on
behalf of global finance.
2) Specifically we demand revocation of the privilege given a
certain private corporation, namely the Reichsbank, to print
money anywhere in the country.
This revocation should be accomplished through the
nationalization of the Reichsbank.
(3) We demand nationalization of all those banks that no longer
perform their valid socioeconomic task of facilitating the
circulation, movement and transfer of money.
Those banks have ruthlessly taken command of our economic life.
They are extorting tribute from the productive sector of our
economy in the form of ever-increasing interest.
4) We demand adequate compensation for the devaluation of
savings on behalf of small pensioners.
The devaluation that resulted from the government’s finance and
tax policies has ruined everyone.
5) We demand specifically that the economic independence and
future of Bavaria not be jeopardized by the assignment of our
priceless natural resource, waterpower, to private finance
capital.
6) We demand that the State undertake the development of water
resources by utilizing our own labor resources.
The State should create the necessary monetary instruments
through its own financial authority.
These instruments will be covered by income from the power
plants that are built.
{Page 111}
7) We demand that the State use its national assets and taxing
power for productive undertakings, not to provide necessary
collateral for borrowing money.
8) We demand restrictions on the raising of capital by
corporations.
Joint stock corporations should use their profits to increase
their productive capacity and nothing else.
They should not be allowed to pay unprecedented dividends while
at the same time assuming unprecedented debt.
These massive amounts of new (borrowed) money represent more
debt, demanding additional interest that can only lead to
increased inflation
The Federation rejects the imputation that its demands are
“utopian” and “designed to spread unrest among the people.”
The recovery of our national economy can be achieved only by
discontinuing national debt service, is vitally important for
everyone.
Therefore, it is not “utopian.”
Whatever public unrest exists is created by the opponents of
economic recovery and by no one else.
It is true that individual selfish interests will harmed here
and there, but discontinuation of interest payments is a
necessary act that can no more be avoided than can a life-saving
operation be avoided on account of the associated discomfort.
The Federation insists that the national economic crisis demands
a solution!
The havoc wreaked by our financial policies is affecting the
entire nation!
These failed policies aggravate all our social problems.
At present, our government cannot satisy the private need for
credit.
An effective program would entail a complete abolition of
interest, for which there is historical precedent.
At present, interest rates are left to the unrestricted demand
of the lenders.
{Page 112}
A solution to the present crisis can be found only by requiring
the lender to share risk as well as profit.
The lender should not receive a blanket guarantee on investment
plus other ever-increasing charges plus the constant unearned
growth of wealth through fixed interest.
The Federation proposes the liberation of all Western nations
from their stupendous indebtedness.
The abolition of interest slavery is the necessary prerequisite
for the solution of ever country’s crisis, not just Germany’s
crisis.
We have proposed a plan to end the titanic struggle now raging
between Labor and Capital in favor of the freedom to work and
produce.
Our plan shows how to accomplish this without undermining the
acquisition of wealth through individual effort, industriousness
and intellectual achievement.
Only by abolishing interest slavery can Germany achieve
reconciliation in a nation torn by class conflict.
It can be achieved only by putting an end to the unearned income
that is derived from the possession of money.
Our greatest social task is the abolition of interest slavery.
This responsibility to abolish interest slavery towers above all
other issues of the day.
It is the only solution to the greatest problem of our time.
The abolition of interest slavery will deliver us from global
Capitalist domination.
It will accomplish this while avoiding both Communist
destruction of the human spirit and Capitalist degradation of
labor.
The abolition of interest slavery opens the way to a truly
social economy, by liberating us from the overwhelming
domination of money.
It opens the way to a state based on creative work and genuine
accomplishment.
---
As a very important source of
strength and security, cherish public credit. -- One method
of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible: --
avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but
remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for
danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to
repel it -- avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not
only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous
exertions in time of Peace to discharge the debts which
unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously
throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought
to bear."
-- President George
Washington, Farewell Address, September 17, 1796

"When Israeli public opinion survey expert
Hanoch Smith asked his Israeli respondents whether the Jews
of America have control of important branches of the
American economy, 73 per cent replied in the affirmative.
In a non-Jewish society, this would have aroused suspicion
of anti-Semitism, but emanating from a Jewish society, it
seemed both a matter of pride and bewilderment."
Colin Shindler,
Ploughshares into Swords:
Israelis and Jews in the Shadow of the Intifada,
(London: I. B. Tauris, 1991) p. 94-95
"Our first and
fundamental maxim should be, never to entangle ourselves
in the broils of Europe. Our second, never to suffer
Europe to intermeddle with cis-Atlantic Affairs.
America, North and South, has a set of interests
distinct from those of Europe, and peculiarly her own.
She should therefore have a system of her own, separate
and apart from that of Europe. While the last is
laboring to become the domicil of despotism, our
endeavor should surely be, to make our hemisphere that
of freedom." -- Thomas Jefferson, to President James
Monroe
Before
America goes to war against Iran, subjects thousands of
Iranians and Americans to death or harm, spends billions of
American dollars, skyrockets oil to over 300 dollars a
barrel and over $10 a gallon, and plunges America and the
world into depression and rampant terrorism, here are a few
good questions! –David Duke
Which country in the Middle East actually possesses nuclear
weapons?
Israel.
Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Israel.
Which country in the Middle East refuses to allow
international inspections of its nuclear facilities?
Israel.
Which countries in the Middle East have called for the
region to be a nuclear-free zone?
The Arab countries and Iran.
Which country in the Middle East occupies land belonging to
other people?
Israel,
Which also occupies a piece of Lebanon, a larger piece of
Syria, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.
Which country in the Middle East has for 60 years refused to
allow refugees to return to their homes and refused to
consider compensation to them for their lost property?
Israel.
Which country has roads on which citizens who are Arab may
not drive and housing developments where Arabs may not live?
Israel.
Which country in the region has violated more United Nations
resolutions than any other?
Israel.
The United States has on more than one occasion gone to war
ostensibly to enforce U.N. Security Council resolutions, but
when it comes to resolutions directed against Israel, the
U.S. is like the amoral monkey that sees, hears and says
nothing. That raises the question of who’s the dog and who’s
the tail?
Which country in the region has in the past been led by men
who at one time were terrorists with a price on their heads?
Israel.
Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir once led the Stern Gang
and ordered, among other things, the assassination of Count
Folke Bernadotte, a Swedish diplomat working for the United
Nations. Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin led the Irgun,
a terrorist gang that among other things blew up one wing of
the King David Hotel, killing nearly 100 people.
Which country in the Middle East openly employs
assassination against its political enemies?
Israel.
There have been assassinations carried out by some of the
Arab governments, but they usually don’t own up to them.
Israel has created a euphemism that the suck-up American
press has readily adopted: “targeted killings.” A British
journalist told me once, “The Palestinians have a talent for
picking bad leaders, and the Israelis have a talent for
murdering their good ones.”
What are the top five countries from which we import oil?
Here they are in order of volume:
Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria. The
next time you hear some blowhard politician ranting about
how the Arabs control our oil imports, remind him or her of
the facts. By far, a majority of oil imports come from
non-Arab countries.
Which country in the region receives an annual gift of $5
billion or more from Congress?
Israel.
Which foreign-aid recipient is the only one allowed to
receive its aid in a lump sum and which routinely invests
part of it in U.S. Treasuries so that taxpayers pay them
interest on the taxpayers’ gift?
Israel.
Which country in the Middle East has the most powerful lobby
in the U.S.?
Israel.
Which country in the Middle East are most American
politicians, journalists and academics afraid to criticize?
Israel.
On behalf of which country has the U.S. vetoed the largest
number of U.N. Security Council resolutions?
Israel.
What is the only Mideast government that actually committed
terrorism against the United States?
Israel.
In 1967, Israeli airplanes and torpedo boats attacked the
USS Liberty, killing 34 and terribly wounding 173 Americans.
The U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the attack, Dean
Rusk, and the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Admiral Thomas Moorer, both have ardently maintained that
Israel knowingly made this terrorist attack against us in an
attempt to blame it on the Egyptians and induce us into war.
In the “Lavon Affair” Israeli agents committed acts of
terrorist bombing against American installations in Egypt in
an attempt to falsely blame the Egyptians and embroil
America into another costly and deadly war. After the Mossad
agents were caught and exposed, Israel had to admit its
terroristic attacks against the United States. Last year the
Israeli government honored the Israeli terrorists, called
them heroes and gave them medals for their acts of terrorism
against America!
These two events are absolutely documented and proven.
The question must be: why do so few Americans even know
about Israel’s terrorism against America? What power in the
media has kept the American people from becoming aware of
the Israeli terrorism, and why, instead of responding to
such terror with a military response, as every American
leader says is the proper response to terrorism, instead we
have only sent the terrorist state more billions of American
tax dollars? What kind of enormous power in media and
politics could accomplish these acts of blatant betrayal of
America?
What country do the people in the region consider the
world’s biggest hypocrite?
The United States
But, it is not the people of the United States who are the
hypocrites but the Zionist Controlled media and politicians!
The American people are simply misinformed by a
Jewish-extremist dominated media and Jewish-controlled
political establishment.
Every truly patriotic American needs to work hard to prevent
this insane, planned war against Iran and the terrible
catastrophe it would be for America and the world. Don’t let
the Jewish extremists lead us into another catastrophic war
for Israel as they have in the Iraq War
Of all the enemies to
public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded,
because it compromises and develops the germ of every
other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed
debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are
the known instruments for bringing the many under the
domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary
powr of the Executive is extended; its influence in
dealing out offices, honors, emoluments is multiplied;
and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to
those of subduing the force of the people. The same
malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the
inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud,
growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of
manners and morals engendered by both. No nation could
preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
-- James
Madison, April 20, 1795
"The management of
foreign relations appears to be the most susceptible of
abuse of allthe trusts committed to a Government because
they can be concealed or disclosed, or disclosed in such
parts and at such times as will best suit particular
views; and because the body of people are less capable
of judging and are more under the influence of
prejudices, on that branch of their affairs, than of any
other. Perhaps, it is a universal truth that the loss
of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions
against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.
-- Thomas
Jefferson, May 13, 1789
"I have always given it
as my decided opinon that no nation has a right to
intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that
every one had a right to form and adopt whatever
government they liked best to live under themselves; and
that if this country could, consistently with its
engagements, maintain a strick neutrality and thereby
preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of
policy, interest, and every other consideration.
-- George Washington,
August 25, 1796
"Let me repeat this FACT...Rothschild bought
Reuters and AP in 1871, by 1880 the controlled ALL
publishing houses (through Morgan)."
Social
Credit, Not Socialism
Social
Credit puts purchasing power in the hands of the
households, rather allowing the Rothschilds and their
American financial agents monopolize credit. The market
economy with consumer sovereignty simply cannot exist
without Social Credit. Money must originate in
households so that families can buy what they require
and value most, so that there will be pay that goes back
to all of the stages of production to the workers and
resources and the entrepreneurs who knew best what the
people were looking for -- not the City of London, Wall
Street, Hong Kong and Shanghi speculators and currency
and credit manipulators. Obama is the slave of the
Rothschilds, a slave charged with enslaving all
Americans, putting us on starvation rations so interest
on the National Debt will be paid.
International usury leads
to monopoly and monopoly soon consolidates with
government into totalitarian state socialism. Only
Social Credit ends and prevents both debt-slavery
finance capitalism and totalitarian socialism.
"Were we
directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap,
we should soon want bread."
-- Thomas
Jefferson, Autobiography

Silvio Gesell also drew up proposals for an international
post-capitalist monetary order, advocating an open world market
without capitalist monopolies, customs frontiers, trade
protectionism, and colonial conquest. In contrast to
subsequently established institutions, such as the International
Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the European Union, which act
on behalf of the powerful within the existing framework of
unjust structures, Gesell called for the establishment of an
International Valuta Association, which would issue and manage a
neutral international monetary unit freely convertible into the
national currency units of the member states, but operating in
such a way that equitable international economic relations could
be established on the basis of global free trade.
A Market Economy without
Capitalism
An overview of the basic
concept, its historical origins and present state of
development
Werner
Onken
American Journal of Economics and
Sociology Vol. 59, No. 4, October, 2000), p. 609 – 622.
In 1891
Silvio Gesell (1862-1930) a German-born entrepreneur living
in Buenos Aires published a short booklet entitled
Die Reformation im Münzwesen
als Brücke zum sozialen Staat (Currency Reform as a
Bridge to the Social State), the first of a series of
pamphlets presenting a critical examination of the monetary
system. It laid the foundation for an extensive body of
writing inquiring into the causes of social problems and
suggesting practical reform measures. His experiences during
an economic crisis at that time in Argentina led Gesell to a
viewpoint substantially at odds with the Marxist analysis of
the social question: the exploitation of human labour does
not have its origins in the private ownership of the means
of production, but rather occurs primarily in the sphere of
distribution due to structural defects in the monetary
system. Like the ancient Greek philosopher Aristoteles,
Gesell recognised money's contradictory dual role as a
medium of exchange for facilitating economic activity on the
one hand and as an instrument of power capable of dominating
the market on the other hand. The starting point for
Gesell's investigations was the following question: How
could money's characteristics as a usurious instrument of
power be overcome, without eliminating its positive
qualities as a neutral medium of exchange?
He attributed this market-dominating power to two
fundamental characteristics of conventional money:
Firstly, money as a medium of demand is capable of being
hoarded in contrast to human labor or goods and services on
the supply side of the economic equation. It can be
temporarily withheld from the market for speculative
purposes without its holder being exposed to significant
losses.
Secondly, money enjoys the advantage of superior liquidity
to goods and services. In other words, it can be put into
use at almost any time or place and so enjoys a flexibility
of deployment similar to that of a joker in a card game.
These two characteristics of money give its holders a
privileged position over the suppliers of goods and
services. This is especially true for those who hold or
control large amounts of money.
They can disrupt the dynamic flow of economic activity, of
purchases and sales, savings and investment. This power
enables the holders of money to demand the payment of
interest as a reward for agreeing to refrain from
speculative hoarding thereby allowing money to circulate in
the economy.
This intrinsic power of money is not dependent on its actual
hoarding, but rather on its potential to disrupt economic
activity which enables it to extract a tribute in the form
of interest in return for allowing the "metabolic exchange"
of goods and services in the "social organism". The "return
on capital" is accorded priority over broader economic
considerations and production becomes attuned more to the
monetary interest rate than to the real needs of human
beings. Long-term positive interest rates of interest
disturb the balance of profit and loss necessary for the
decentralized self-regulation of markets. Gesell was of the
opinion that this led to a dysfunction of the social system
exhibiting very complex symptoms: the non-neutrality of
interest-bearing money results in an inequitable
distribution of income which no longer reflects actual
differences in productivity. This in turn leads to a
concentration of monetary as well as of non-monetary capital
and therefore to the predominance of monopolistic structures
in the economy.
Since it is the holders of money who ultimately decide
whether it circulates or stands still, money can't flow
"automatically" like blood in the human body. The
circulation and the correct dosage of the monetary supply
can't be brought under effective public control;
deflationary and inflationary fluctuations of the general
price level are inevitable. In the course of the business
cycle when declining interest rates cause large amounts of
money to be withheld from the market until the outlook for
profitable investments improves, the result is economic
stagnation and unemployment.
Neutral Servant of Economic Activity
In order to deprive money of its power, Gesell did not
advocate recourse to measures aimed at outlawing the taking
of interest such as the canonical prohibition of medieval.
On the contrary, he envisaged structural changes in the
monetary system involving the imposition of carrying costs
on the medium of exchange, thereby counteracting the
tendency to hoard and neutralising the liquidity advantage
of conventional money. The imposition of such carrying costs
on liquid monetary assets - comparable to a demurrage fee
for freight containers in the field of transport economics -
would deprive money of its power to dominate the market
while allowing it to fulfil its designated function as a
medium of exchange facilitating economic activity.
Counteracting disruptions in the circulation of the medium
of exchange due to speculative hoarding would allow the
quantity and velocity of the monetary supply to be
periodically adjusted to match the volume of production and
the overall level of economic activity in such a way that
the purchasing power of the monetary unit could be made to
possess the same long-term stability as other weights and
measures.
In his earliest works Gesell referred in particular to
"rusting bank notes" as a method for implementing an
"organic reform" of the monetary system. Money which had
hitherto been "dead foreign matter" with respect to both the
social system and the natural world, would thus be
integrated into the eternal cycle of life and death,
becoming transitory and losing its characteristic of
limitless self-multiplication by means of simple and
compound interest. Such a reform of the monetary system
would constitute a regulative holistic therapy; by removing
the cause of disruptions in monetary circulation Gesell
envisaged that the self-healing powers of the dysfunctional
social "organism" would gradually increase allowing it to
recover from the diverse economic and structural symptoms of
crisis, ultimately reaching a state of equilibrium, in
harmony with the rest of the natural order.
In his main work, Die
Natürliche Wirtschaftsordnung durch Freiland und Freigeld
(The Natural Economic Order through Free and and Free
Money), published in Berlin and Bern in 1916, Gesell
explained in detail how the supply and demand of capital
would be balanced in the case of uninterrupted currency
circulation so that a reduction of the real rate of interest
below the presently existing barrier of around 3-4% would
become possible. Gesell used the term "basic interest" (Urzins)
to denote this pure monetary interest rate of around 3-4%
which is found to vary little historically. It represents
the tribute of the working people to the power of money and
gives rise to levels of unearned income far in excess of
that suggested by its magnitude. Gesell predicted that his
proposed currency reform would gradually cause the "basic
interest" component to disappear from the monetary loan rate
leaving only a risk premium and an administrative charge to
allow lending institutions to cover their costs.
Fluctuations of the market rate of interest around a new
equilibrium point close to zero would allow a more
effectively decentralised channeling of savings into
appropriate investments. Free Money (Freigeld), a medium of
exchange liberated from the historical tribute of "basic
interest", would be neutral in its impact on distribution
and could no longer influence the nature and extent of
production to the disadvantage of producers and consumers.
Gesell envisaged that access to the complete proceeds of
labour brought about by the elimination of "basic interest"
would enable large sections of the population to give up
wage- and salary-oriented employment and to work in a more
autonomous manner in private and cooperative business
organisations.
Land: A vital natural resource to be held in trust rather
than as a tradeable commodity and object of speculation.
Towards the end of the last century Gesell extended his
vision of socio-economic reform to include reform of the
system of land tenure. He derived inspiration in this
respect from the work of the North-American land reformer
Henry George (1839-1897), author of Progress and Poverty,
whose ideas about a Single Tax on the rental value of land
became known in Germany through the activity of land
reformers like Michael Flurscheim (1844-1912) and Adolf
Damaschke (1865-1935). In contrast to Damaschke, who only
advocated taxing the increase in values for the benefit of
the community while retaining the principle of private
ownership of land, Gesell's reform proposals followed those
of Flurscheim who called for the transfer of land into
public ownership, compensating the former owners and
thereafter leasing the land for private use to the highest
bidder. Gesell argued that as long as land remains a
tradeable commodity and an object of speculative profit, the
organic connection of human beings with the earth is
disturbed. In contrast to the proponents of nationalist or
racially-oriented Blut und Boden ideologies, Gesell rejected
the association of "blood" with "land". As a widely
travelled citizen of the world he viewed the whole earth as
an integral organ of every individual. All people should be
free to travel over the surface of the earth without
hinderance and settle anywhere regardless of their place of
birth, color or religion.
Like the Single-Tax reformers of the Henry George school,
Gesell was of the opinion that the rental revenue from the
land would enable the state to finance itself without the
necessity to impose further taxes. In attempting to trace
the rightful owners of these rental revenues in accordance
with the principle of causality, he was led to the
consideration that the amount of rental revenue depends on
the population density and therefore ultimately on the
willingness of women to bear and raise children. For this
reason Gesell proposed to distribute the revenues from land
rent in the form of monthly payments to compensate mothers
for the work of rearing children in proportion to the number
of their childen under the age of majority. He advocated the
extension of the scheme to include mothers of children born
out of wedlock and foreign mothers living in Germany because
his intention was that all mothers should be released from
economic dependence upon working fathers and that the
relationship between the sexes ought to be based on a love
freed from considerations of power and economic dependancy.
In an essay entitled Der Aufstieg des Abendlandes (The
Ascent of the West), written to challenge the cultural
pessimism of Oswald Spengler's
Der Untergang des Abendlandes
(The Decline of the West),Gesell expressed the hope that the
human race which had been physically, mentally and
spiritually degraded under capitalism would gradually be
able to regenerate itself under a reformed economic order
and experience a new cultural renaissance.
Other Pioneers of a Market Economy without Capitalism
Gesell's theory of a Free Economy based on land and monetary
reform may be understood a reaction both to the
laissez-faire principle of classical liberalism as well as
to Marxist visions of a centrally planned economy. It should
not be thought
of as a third way between capitalism or communism in the
sense of subsequent "convergence theories" or so-called
"mixed economy" models, i.e. capitalist market economies
with global state supervision, but rather as an alternative
beyond hitherto realized economic systems.
In political terms it may be characterised as "a market
economy without capitalism".
In this sense as he later came to realise and acknowledge,
Gesell had independently developed and extended the critique
of capitalism formulated by Pierre Joseph Proudhon (1809-
1865), the French social reformer and contemporary of Marx
who in the mid-19th century had cited the private
appropriation of land and the power of interest-bearing
money as being primarily responsible for the fact that a
more egalitarian society had failed to evolve following the
demise of feudal absolutism. Proudhon condemned privately
appropriated ground-rent as robbery and denounced interest
on money as cancerous usury. These forms of unearned income
based on exploitation led to the emergence of the haute
bourgeoisie as a new ruling class, which moulded the state
and church into instruments of domination over the petit
bourgeoisie and the working-class. Gesell's alternative
economic model is related to the liberal socialism of the
cultural philosopher Gustav Landauer (1870-1919) who was
also influenced by Proudhon and who for his part strongly
influenced Martin Buber (1878-1965). There are intellectual
parallels to the liberal socialism of the physician and
sociologist Franz Oppenheimer (1861-1943) and to the social
philosophy of Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), the founder of the
anthroposophic movement.
Free Economy Organisations in Germany and in Switzerland
during the First World War
Gesell's first co-worker, Georg Blumenthal (1879-1929),
combined proposals for land and monetary reform with the
concept of a droit naturel or natural social order, with
which Francois Quesnay (1694-1774) and his fellow-Physiocrats
had opposed feudal absolutism at the time of the French
Enlightenment. In 1909 he founded the Physiokratische
Vereinigung (Physiocratic Association) the first formal
organisation of supporters of Gesell's Free Economy theory
which drew its members from the ranks of land reformers,
individual-anarchists and syndicalists in Berlin and
Hamburg. As soon as the association's journal, Der
Physiokrat (The Physiocrat), fell victim to censorship
during the First World War, Gesell moved to Switzerland,
where he found supporters among the local land reformers,
educational reformers and other progressive circles. They
organised themselves into the Schweizer
Freiland-Freigeld-Bund (Swiss Free Land - Free Money -
Federation). In two lectures entitled Gold oder Frieden?
(Gold or Peace?) and Freiland die eherne Forderung des
Friedens (Free Land - the Essential Condition of Peace),
Gesell expounded in detail on the significance of his reform
proposals as a way to social justice and peace among the
nations.
The world view of the
Rothschild interests is that capitalism is about what
Schumpeter called "creative destruction," creative ways for
the Rothschild's to rob, displace and murder everyone like
us. For example, Walter Russell Mead, of the Council on
Foreign Relations says of the Kleptastrophe, that it is
merely the latest wave continual crises: "I look at the
history of the last 350 years, and it's been 350 years of
constant financial crisis, and all of these other crises
haven't derailed the continued construction of this...
global liberal system. The social capacity to innovate and
respond well to change is probably going to be the most
significant factor in power in the 21st century." The
Future Belongs to the Rothschilds.
“Every new production must be financed not by the savings
coming from the payment of past production, but by new
credits. And these credits must only be withdrawn to the
extent that there is consumption or depreciation of
wealth.” -- Major Cliffor Hugh Douglas
The City Editor puts to me this poser, which he says I must
answer—viz.:—“ How the making of more goods when there are
more goods than can be sold will produce buyers, and how the
issue of bits of paper will enable the Indian planter to be
paid for his tea ?” His question is not quite complete, and
I must first inquire whether the cause of such
overproduction is due to the public having become surfeited
with all these goods, or merely because a foolish financial
system has so contracted the volume of purchasing power that
there is not sufficient to enable those desiring such goods
to buy with ? Overproduction can occur for only one of two
causes—viz., because the wants of all are satisfied, or
because of an insufficiency of purchasing power in the
pockets of the public. Our present stagnation is due to
under-consumption. Or does the City Editor imagine that the
present paralysis of trade is due to the fact that very few
people are in need of goods ? If some magician could
present 10 legal pounds to every poor person in this realm,
is it not certain that within a few days or weeks every
factory would be running full time and every unemployed and
employable person could be able to find a job ? As to the
Indian tea planter, so long as Treasury notes are
convertible into rupees or drafts upon the banks of India,
he need not worry about not being paid for his tea. The
exchanges would then gradually fall in India’s favour and
enable trade to be resumed, which was destroyed by the
politicians who have been tinkering with the currencies of
both countries. -- Arthur
Kitson
My opponent says that there are “ three outstanding
fallacies ” in my articles, the predominant one being that “
the real problem is to discover some method of selling goods
as fast as they are produced.” He says—“ The real problem
is not to exchange goods for money, but to exchange them
through the medium of money for other goods.” My answer is
that so long as I can exchange goods for money I can always
buy the goods I need with the money. I fail to see any “
problem ” in this.
Again he says :— “ Money is the medium of exchange ; if the
problem could be solved by merely printing money it could be
solved here and now.” A Daniel come to judgment ! This is
my contention. It was by printing Treasury notes that our
banks, our industries, in fact our country was saved in
August, 1914, just as we and other nations have been saved
by a similar measure during similar crises. And those who
are now sneering at these so-called “bits of paper,” were
the very first to acclaim them when everything was in the
melting pot.
-- Arthur Kitson
Arthur
Kitson is the link between American populism and Social
Credit. William Jennings Bryan, convinced by Kitson's
arguments ran for the nationalization of credit in his last
presidential campaign. Decades ahead of C.H. Douglas with
many concepts, he nonetheless endorsed Douglas's Social
Credit program and worked for it until his death.
It has been pointed out by Mr. Arthur
Kitson, and others, that since this credit structure is
based on gold, which bears no conceivable relation in
quantity to any human requirement for goods and services,
gold production exercises a totally disproportionate effect
on the mechanism of prices and credit. But the difficulty
goes much deeper than that. Not only does the gold basis of
the present financial system shift, but the ratio of the
credits erected on it also shifts sometimes violently. This
is, of course, due to the vital fact that the public even
under a gold basis of credit can utterly destroy the whole
credit structure by demanding gold in payment of their
cheques on the banks, because the basis of present cash
credits is that they are convertible into currency on
demand, and there is, of course, not a tithe of the gold
necessary to cash them. Engineered, no of doubt, to a large
extent by the enemies this country, that is what nearly
happened in August, 1914 (and would always happen under
similar conditions), with the result that in order to defeat
the manoeuvre, the financial system was shifted from a gold
to a paper credit basis in a few weeks' time, never, let us
hope, to return to so fertile a source of misery. --
Major Clifford Hugh
Douglas
Social Credit accomplished
the goal of Lincoln. Under socialism everyone is a slave to
a state that claims to dictate the "will of the people", but
under social credit, the government gets out of the way and
those who can serve the demands of the family household best
prospers.
"What is the true
condition of the laborer? It take it that it is best
for all to leave each man free to acquire property as
fast as he can. Some will get wealthy. I don't believe
in a law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do
more harm than good. . . . I want every man to have the
chance -- and I believe the black man is entitled to it
too -- in which he can better his condition -- when he
may look forward and hope to be a hired laborer this
year and the next, work for himself afterward, and
finally to hire men to work for him! That is the true
system." A-- Abraham Lincoln, March 6, 1860
Arthur Kitson, Unemployment excerpt:
V.—REAL AND FINANCIAL
CREDIT
THE evidences that our present economic system is doomed
and is tottering to its fall are so apparent and so numerous
that only the blind and the ignorant would attempt to deny it.
A system that defeats its main object and increases human
suffering in proportion as it becomes more and more efficient,
one to which the gift of goods or the payment of an indemnity by
a foreign nation appears as a national disaster, is evidently
founded upon some egregious fallacies. How much longer its
victims will submit to the evils and injustice it has inflicted
it is difficult to say. It may last another few months or a
number of years, but that its end is rapidly approaching is
beyond question.
Whatever the motives of the Government and its
advisers may have been, their policy of currency and credit
contraction, which Mr. Austen Chamberlain announced a year or so
ago, has done more to hasten its downfall than all the Socialist
and Bolshevist propaganda of the past few years. This policy is
mainly responsible for throwing out of employment over 1,000,000
operatives and inflicting losses upon the British public during
the past year of at least £2,500,000,000 ! During the same
period, according to the
Manufacturers’ Record, of Baltimore (a widely read American
trade journal), the same policy of deflation pursued by the
United States bankers has resulted in the discharge of 3,500,000
workmen and the loss of 25,000,000,000 dollars—a sum much in
excess of the whole cost of the war incurred by the American
Government !
ORTHODOX POLITICAL ECONOMY.
In all countries we find the same conditions
of general unrest, dissatisfaction, and desire for better
conditions, due to the failure of their economic methods to
achieve the desired ends. Orthodox political economy has broken
down and has had to acknowledge its failure. And as all our
statesmen and governing officials, professors, and writers on
finance know little or nothing outside the orthodox books, they
are all equally at sea and powerless to save humanity. All
industrial nations are experiencing the same difficulties, for
the reason that all are modelled on the same general principles.
These principles have created what may be
termed the pyramidal form of economic control. At the apex sits
Finance, securely entrenched, dictating to Industry its
commands—commands which on the whole are impossible of
fulfilment. Industry is ordered to breathe into the inanimate
the breath of life and make it a living soul, to make fruitful a
thing which, as Aristotle told us ages ago, is by its very
nature essentially barren. Finance hands over to Industry a sum
of money, and says, “ Take this and increase it. Make it grow.
You cannot labour, you cannot produce, you cannot even trade
without it, thanks to the world’s money laws. Here is
£1,000,000,000. I lend it you on condition that you return me
for its use one-twentieth part of it every year, and the whole
of it in addition to the interest
whenever I choose to call in the loan !”
If Industry had ever possessed one fraction of
the intelligence proportional to its physical strength it would
long since have made reply in some such terms as these :—“ I am
incapable of performing miracles. I cannot put your money in
the ground and make it blossom and bring forth harvests of coins
or bank notes. If you give me seeds or plants containing the
germ of life, I can plant them and raise crops and return you
far more plants and seeds than those you gave me. But when you
lend me £1,000,000,000 and ask me to pay you £50,000,000 per
annum, I can only do this for a period of 20 years. By that
time I shall have returned all you gave me, and as you alone
control the issue, and since I have no power of getting more
without your consent and help, you are asking me to do the
impossible ! Further, this credit, which you alone control, on
what is it really based ? Evidently upon my work and upon my
achievements. But for me and my energies, where would you be ?
The credit of which special laws have given you control is the
credit of the whole nation, and due to its productive capacity.
You have done nothing to create or increase it. All you do is
to build on and profit by my labours. Yet you presume to
dictate to me, to limit
my power, to embarrass and
torture me with your foolish
restrictions, and cause endless friction, contention, and
disorganization between my associates, capital and labour !”
INDUSTRY A “BOND SLAVE.”
To which Finance—were it frank and
honest—would reply, “Quite so ! You are my bond slave.
National laws have made you and all nations wholly subject to my
despotism. You can never escape the bondage of debt whilst the
principle of usury lives. The best and wisest of men, from
Confucius to John Ruskin, have been preaching this gospel—but
with little or no effect ! I have no fear that mankind will
ever awaken to the truth !”
The most important question for the existing
generation is—What sort of system is to take the place of the
old and decaying one ? Are we to exchange it—bad as it is and
has been—for a worse ? For let us admit that with all its
fallacies, follies, and injustices, there are and have been
systems far worse—Bolshevism, for example, and the Socialism of
the German Jew, Karl Marx. There is some danger that much more
vigorous efforts will yet be made to establish one or other of
these systems in this and other countries than any yet
attempted. Unless another and better system is provided by the
more intelligent classes it is quite certain that something of a
far worse character may be established by the ignorant masses.
The pity of it all is that our present system, shorn of its
fallacies, its financial restrictions and credit monopoly, and
improved in one or two other features, might have developed into
a scheme as efficient and as conducive to human welfare as it is
possible to conceive. Eliminate those evils which are almost
entirely confined to the financial side, and our industrial, and
consequently most of our international and social troubles, will
disappear.
Now it is towards the accomplishment of this
end and to save civilization from bankruptcy that Major C.H.
Douglas and his colleague have evidently directed their efforts
in the two books previously mentioned — “ Economic Democracy ”
and “ Credit Power and Democracy.” It was, I understand, whilst
engaged in costings for the Government during the war that Major
Douglas, a member of the Royal Air Force, became convinced that
the present economic system was inherently defective and could
not survive the extraordinary strains imposed upon it by the
war, and particularly by the supreme folly of our war debt.
Apart from the intrinsic merit of these works, to me the most
interesting feature connected with them is the fact that their
authors arrive at the same general conclusion that I and one or
two other investigators have done, although we have all reached
it by different routes. This conclusion is, that
the root cause of the world’s
economic evils is the irrational and fraudulent financial
systems which the monetary and banking laws of all nations have
established.
THE USURY PRINCIPLE.
A quarter of a century ago I pointed out, in
my first monetary work, that the usury principle necessarily
caused a general break-down of the industrial system every few
years, because the claims of usury were impossible of
fulfilment. I showed that, taking industry as a whole, it could
no more settle the claims of the banks when called upon to do so
within any short period than the banks could settle the claims
of their depositors in gold within a similar time. The creation
of legal tender and bank credit does not keep pace with the
growth of the interest charges, taxes, and other debts which
have to be paid in legal currency, after providing for the
ordinary financial needs of trade ! Industry being always in
debt to Finance is always within sight of bankruptcy, and any
extraordinary event, whether natural, political, or financial,
which creates general alarm is sufficient to start a panic
resulting in gerneral liquidation and bankruptcy, followed by a
period of industrial depression ! This was and is still in my
judgment the real explanation of those decennial crises which
Professor Jevons attributed to sunspots and other writers to
natural and equally irrelevant causes. I showed that although
money is the life of trade, our restricted money supplies
encompassed its death.
Major Douglas found, by a system of costings,
that the purchasing power distributed to the public by the
industrial system in all countries could not possibly enable
them to purchase more than a small proportion of the goods made,
even if these were offered at the minimum price of bare costs.
The chief reason of this is that credit is only issued on the
usury principle, and therefore only those engaged in operations
which appear profitable—i.e.,
enabling the borrower to return the sum loaned plus interest
charges—can secure bank overdrafts. Hence every borrower is
compelled to seek some profitable employment, to stimulate
production, to adopt new inventions, &c. This necessitates the
constant employment of armies of men engaged solely in
constructing new plants, processes, tools, &c. And the cost and
upkeep of all this additional capital, although it furnishes
little in the way of additional purchasing power to the public,
is actually incorporated in the prices of the ultimate goods
offered for sale and for the manufacture of which the extra
capital was created. In short, the public is made to pay for
every addition to the productive plant and machinery through the
system of costings which is added to the prices of the ultimate
goods sold. Hence by increasing our productive facilities we
are decreasing the public power to purchase goods and are thus
diminishing our markets. The system is therefore inherently
suicidal !
OBJECT OF INDUSTRY.
Major Douglas sets out with the statement that
the object of a nation’s industrial system is to produce goods
for the benefit of the people comprising that nation, and not to
provide employment for workmen nor to “ make money ” for any
particular class. Employment may be a necessary condition for
producing goods, but it is merely a means and not the end.
Further, the distribution of goods ought not to be based merely
upon a system of rewards for labour done. For this spells
starvation to those whose labour is no longer needed. Our
industrial system is the result of the inventions and
discoveries, the experiences, the efforts and labours of past
generations. About 95 per cent. of all production is the result
of tools and processes which form the cultural inheritance of
the community—not as workers, but as a community. Every person
born into such a community should, by right of birth, be
entitled to a share in this great legacy. Major Douglas
proposes that the wage system shall be gradually replaced by the
dividend system. He divides credit into two classes, viz., real
(productive) credit and financial (money) credit. Real credit
is the correct estimate of ability to deliver goods as, when,
and where required. Financial credit is the correct estimate of
ability to deliver money as, when, and where required. Real
credit is concerned with the supply of goods, whilst financial
credit is based upon money (legal tender).
The real credit of Great Britain can be
increased almost indefinitely and is already so enormous that at
no time—not even during the war—has it ever been employed to its
full capacity. Yet although financial credit is based upon
money and demands only money in return for its use, it depends
ultimately upon the productive credit of the nation both for its
existence and for its growth. This growth, however, is purely
arbitrary and depends upon the sanction of the bankers and
financiers who have acquired a monopoly of the use of the
nation’s financial credit. Indeed, this monopoly is so flagrant
and so powerful that the rate at which money may be loaned to
the public (to whom it rightfully belongs) is actually dictated
week by week by half-a-dozen men representing a private trading
company called the Bank of England—over whose deliberations and
actions the Government and the public have no more control than
over those of any private business concern in Great Britain !
Production, and therefore employment, are made dependent upon
industry’s ability to satisfy the arbitrary demands of the
numerically insignificant class who hold this control, and as
there is no law by which these credit controllers can be
compelled to issue credit or assist trade, both labour and
capital are entirely at their mercy.
"This is the
history of governments -- one man does something which is to
bind another. A man who cannot know me, taxes me; looking
from afar at me, he ordains that a part of my labor shall go
to this or that whimsical end -- not as I, but as he happens
to fancy. Behold the consequence. Of all debts men are
least willing to pay the taxes. What a satire on
government! Everywhere people think they get their money's
worth, except in these exactions.
-- Ralph
Waldo Emerson, Essay on
Politics

C. H. Douglas
Credit Power and Democracy (excerpts)
Full text of
this book here:
CHAPTER IX
THE conclusions to be derived from a
consideration of the conditions observed to
exist in the modern economic and industrial systems may
therefore be tabulated somewhat after this fashion :
(1) The outstanding feature of the Machine Age is the
increment of production obtainable through co-opera- tion
and the employment of real capital.
(2) The link which enables numbers of individuals to
co-operate is Credit based on Capital that is to say, a
belief that, by making, with the aid of tools, certain
articles which the maker does not himself want, he will
obtain more easily and more exactly his desires in respect
of goods and services which he does want, than by applying
himself to their production directly. At the present time
the real basis of credit is broader than ever before, but
the psychological basis is failing, owing to the misuse of
capital.
(3) The material of which this link is fashioned we call
money, which, what-ever form it may take, derives its value
solely from the belief, the " credit/' that it is an
effective agent for the realisation of the proposition
contained in (2).
(4) The mobilisation and issue of this money, for productive
purposes, rests primarily with the banks, which are not
concerned directly with the maintenance of this co-operative
relation, but rather with the rapidity with which the credit
units so mobilised and issued are restored to the financial
system. This is not the fault of the banks, but of the
public and of the system.
(5) From (4) it follows that, where money is the inducement,
the control of the policy of production that is to say, the
decision both as to what articles shall be produced and
their quantity and quality rests, not with the
administration of productive enterprises, but as to its
initiation with the banks and others who finance their
production, and as to its continuance with the price-makers
whose motive is in the very nature of things anti-public,
since it aims at depriving, with the maximum rapidity, the
individuals who comprise the public of the inde- pendence
conferred upon them by the possession of purchasing-power.
(6) The public, as individuals, can only acquire control of
the policy of the economic and industrial system by
acquiring control of credit-issue and price-making. The
organ of credit- issue is the bank, and the meaning of
price-making is credit- withdrawal.
Now, there are probably very few serious, reasonably
unbiased, and qualified students of these questions who
would, after full consideration, be prepared to deny any of
the foregoing propositions, but many such find it difficult
to understand and agree with the contention advanced in the
fore- going pages and in the previous volume (" Economic
Democracy/' Chapter IX. et seq.) that an essential postulate
of a better state of things i.e., public control of economic
policy through public control of credit is that
ultimate-commodity prices should be less than costs; that an
article used by an individual should be sold for less than
the money it costs to produce. To any- one in this
difficulty the following question may be helpful : // credit
controls the policy of production, how can it be possible
for the public to control credit and policy if all the
credit necessary to induce production is restored to the
banks from the public through the automatic agency of
uncontrolled Prices ?
It is, of course, possible to control the initiation of any
specified form of production by controlling credit-issue
only, but, once started, there is nothing whatever to
prevent an obsolete article from being produced and forced,
by advertisement and monopoly, on a misguided public, long
after a better, cheaper, and generally superior article is
available, so long as the credit necessary to induce
production in common terms, the cost of production is taken
from the public automatically through the agency of prices.
If, however, the entrepreneur, while subject to all the
desirable features of free competition between
establishments, involved by effective cost-keeping, is
obliged, in order to compete at all, to come to some
publicly controlled credit-bank at short intervals for the
means to make up the difference between a price regulated
(not fixed) by a fractional multiplier applied to all costs
of production of articles sold to the individuals composing
the public (as explained in Chapter X., " Economic Democracy
"), then, and it seems probable only then, do we acquire a
valid, flexible, active control, not only of the initiation,
but of the development and modification of production, by
the public acting in their interest as individuals.
It will be understood that these con- siderations do not
affect the validity or otherwise of the basis on which it is
con- tended that this fractional multiplier should rest that
has already been dealt with at some length ; it is merely
intended to show here that, without some such arrangement
which places the co-operative producer in the power of the
consumer, instead of the exactly opposite condition which
now obtains, effective democracy is pure moonshine, and all
progress is stultified. Any practical business man will know
of cases probably of dozens of cases where processes and
discoveries of immense value have been wilfully stifled
because it did not suit producers to modify their product.
There are ugly rumours about at this moment of certain
enormously valuable petrol substitutes cornered and quietly
shelved by the oil interests by no means the worst of the
Trusts which enslave us. From every quarter come more or
less authenticated stories of calculated waste and sabotage
Eastern-returned travellers gossiping of mountains of
rotting blankets lining the Suez Canal, Australians of the
millions of bushels of rat-eaten and mouldering wheat
cumbering their stores.
We do not acquire, by these suggested methods, control by
the public, as such, of the processes of production the "
how " it shall be done. That is not the business of the
public, as such, but of experts. But by controlling both
credit-issue and price-making the public acquires control of
policy with all its attributes the effective appointment and
removal of personnel, amongst others. The essential nature
of a satisfactory modern co-operative State may be broadly
expressed as consisting of a functionally aristocratic
hierarchy of producers accredited by, and serving, a
democracy of consumers. The business of producers is to
produce ; to take orders, not to give them ; and the
business of the public, as consumers, is not only to give
orders, but to see that they are obeyed as to results, and
to remove unsuitable or wilfully recalcitrant persons from
the aristocracy of production to the democracy of
consumption.
No peace will ever settle on the dis- tracted earth until
this matter has been fought to a finish, and it rests with
the intelligence of those who are from time to time in a
position to guide popular movements, whether a mere remnant
of civilisation will achieve the Golden Age awaiting the
settlement, or whether a decisive verdict is close at hand.
CHAPTER X
The production of Real
Credit Delusive account-ing The limits of Financial
Credit-issue Present economic system based on currency
Coming system will be based on Real Credit The fraudulent
standard Delivery is part of credit-basis The fallacy of
"National Poverty" Increased effective demand necessary.
CHAPTER X
THERE is another and somewhat more specious objection raised
to the statement that the just price of an article for
individual consumption is less than the cost price by the
ratio of consumption-credit to production-credit; and that
is a statement that production only very slightly exceeds
consumption.
It will be realised that this is a very specious statement,
if we accept it for the moment as being true, and consider
exactly what is implied. When a Blue book, or other mine of
statistical and generally perverted information, asserts
that the imports and exports of a country are thus and such,
it intends to convey the impression that the aggregate
price-values as shown on bills of lading, reach the figures
given. That is to say, the " balance of trade " of any
country, either as reflected in its exchange or by any other
commercial test, is simply a matter of sales-management you
have only to make grand-pianos a necessary of life, corner
grand-pianos, restrict the sale, and, presto ! half a dozen
grand-pianos will balance the import of all the wheat and
wool that Australia and the Argentine can send us.
Exactly the same thing is true of values produced and
consumed. The community, while producing, as one of its
functions, both capital goods and ultimate products or
consumption goods, only consumes, as a collection of
individuals, the latter. But individuals in the aggregate
must pay both for capital production and ultimate products,
whether consumed or not, under the present financial system,
for the very simple reason that they are paid for, and there
is no one else to pay for them. Also, as we know quite well
that practically every business firm " turns over " the
money employed in its business at least once, and generally
several times a year, and that each complete aggregate "
turn-over " means, broadly, that all costs incurred have
been recovered from the public, we either have to believe
that not only are the whole of the ultimate products covered
by the period of turnover, consumed in that time, but also
the whole of the machinery, buildings, small tools, etc.,
which is plainly ridiculous. It is, of course, obvious,
after a little consideration, that what happens is that the
consumption- values i.e., prices retrieved from the consumer
contain all costs i.e., credit issued to the consumer in the
form of wages and salaries; and therefore must financially
approximate to the money value of production.
Now, because " production " is, at present, the chief agency
through which is circulated the purchasing-power necessary
for dis- tribution, there is an immensely strong incentive
to sabotage the waste of work on the side both of the
Capitalist and of Labour and for this reason the consumption
of the world is most unquestionably far higher than it ought
to be. But even taking this into consideration, it must be
obvious that the credit-value of production the amount by
which the work of a community during a given period of time
increases the correct estimate of the capacity of that
community, with its plant, culture, and labour, to deliver
goods and services is enormously in advance of the actual
consumption. Every single telephone instrument installed,
every improvement in transport, every new process for
producing nitratic fertilisers, only
to indicate the principle by a few trivial examples, clearly
increases this real credit at compound interest.
Financial credit, even now, is issued roughly against all
forms of real credit. The only sane limit to the issue of
credit for use as purchasing-power is the limit imposed by
ability to deliver the goods for which it forms an effective
demand, providing that the community agrees to their
manufacture.
Consequently, if as the result of six months' work the
capacity to deliver goods and services has been increased
per unit of time, it would appear to be simply common sense,
with the foregoing proviso, to distribute the means which
make it possible to draw on this potential production,
without forced export.
When the Capitalist system takes back from the public the
whole of the costs incurred in production, it takes back the
whole of the financial credit, and the purchasing-power
covering the period of activity in respect of which that
credit
was distributed, whereas the real credit of that period
includes the overwhelmingly important unearned increment of
association during that period. To take the most elementary
of examples: if we consider a factory, engaged only on one
article, during the second six months of its first year of
existence, it will probably increase its output very
considerably beyond that possible in the first six months.
If, however, of the financial credit, or purchasing - power,
which we distribute during the first six months we only take
back in prices that portion represented by the ratio of
actual consumption to potential
production, we can, if we so desire, produce up to the
limit of our capacity during the second six months in the
assurance that an effective demand awaits us.
It is vitally necessary to be clear as to the difference
between what actually takes place under an economic system
based, essentially, on currency, and the position which
would result from the modification to the financial system
which we are discussing; which would be based, essentially,
on the economic capacity of society to achieve its desires.
Where metallic gold is the ultimate basis of value, and
therefore the ultimate currency, and all credit-issues are
made on the assumed necessity of some theoretical or
empirical relationship between the amount of gold in the
banks and the total credit-issues, and we assume that
there is an average period over which credits operate, and
that credits are the means of financing production, then
total credits, multiplied by average time, are a measure
of the rate of production. It has been pointed out by Mr.
Arthur Kitson, and others, that since this credit structure
is based on gold, which bears no conceivable relation in
quantity to any human requirement for goods and services,
gold production exercises a totally disproportionate effect
on the mechanism of prices and credit. But the difficulty
goes much deeper than that. Not only does the gold basis of
the present financial system shift, but the ratio of the
credits erected on it also shifts sometimes violently. This
is, of course, due to the vital fact that the public even
under a gold basis of credit can utterly destroy the whole
credit structure by demanding gold in payment of their
cheques on the banks, because the basis of present cash
credits is that they are convertible into currency on
demand, and there is, of course, not a tithe of the gold
necessary to cash them. Engineered, no of doubt, to a large
extent by the enemies this country, that is what nearly
happened in August, 1914 (and would always happen under
similar conditions), with the result that in order to defeat
the manoeuvre, the financial system was shifted from a gold
to a paper credit basis in a few weeks' time, never, let us
hope, to return to so fertile a source of misery.
But although the gold basis has gone, the simulacrum of it
still lingers in the shape of a credit system based on an
un- regulated paper currency, with the result that a sort of
Druids' dance of credit-issue, rising prices, currency
stringency, currency issue, more credit based on more
currency, goes on, the only possible redeeming feature of
which is to take the whole cycle right away from the fetish
of gold. Apart from this one point, everyone suffers except
those whose business it is, in the most literal sense of the
words, to make money. So much for the conditions brought
about by a financial system which attempts to base its
credits on the currency, and yet allows its prices to rise
with both. The alternative shifts the credit basis still
farther.
We have already seen that the only possible basis of real
credit is a belief, amounting to knowledge, in the
correctness of the credit-estimate of a society, with all
its resources, to deliver goods and services at a certain
rate. If we make this basis our financial basis, then the
credit-structure erected on it can only be destroyed by
social suicide by the refusal of the community to function.
Now, one of the com- ponents of the capacity of a society to
deliver goods and services is the existence of an effective
demand for those goods and services. It is not the very
slightest use, under existing conditions, that there are
thousands of most excellent houses vacant in this country,
when the cost of living in them totally exceeds the
effective financial demand of the individuals who would like
to live in them. . The houses are there, and the people are
there, but the delivery
does not take place. The business of a modern and effective
financial system is to issue credit to the consumer, up to
the limit of the productive capacity of the producer, so
that either the consumers' real demand is satiated, or the
producers' capacity is exhausted, whichever happens first.
This can obviously be done by making issues of
purchasing-power to cover the whole estimated productive
capacity, and taking it back to the extent that this
capacity is diminished from any cause whatever, a state of
affairs which rapidly results in making everyone " rich " in
the current sense of the term ; which, it should be clearly
borne in mind, does not at all mean that an individual's
real consumption is large very often quite the contrary but
that the individual in question has the mechanism at hand by
which to obtain what he does want.
It is, of course, generally argued that there is not enough
wealth to go round, and all sorts of absurd and misleading
statistics have been evolved to prove that if all the
accumulated wealth of the nation were evenly divided up, the
average wealth per head would only amount to a very small
sum, say 50. The right understanding of exactly where this
fallacy arises is probably one of the shortest cuts to an
understanding of the whole position, which involves a
recognition of the difference between claims on capital, and
administrative ownership of capital.
Financial wealth can only be placed on a solid basis by
selling something to the public it is, for instance, no use
owning a factory only suitable for the manufacture of
high-explosive shells if the public taste for high-explosive
shells has completely departed.
But farther than that, even if the public wants nothing but
high-explosive shells in the largest quantities (which, from
the behaviour of its " representatives/ ' seems highly
probable), it would be necessary that an effective demand
that is to say, a demand backed by " money " should be
forthcoming from the public. Now, the value of our
hypothetical shell factory would vary from zero when there
is no effective demand, to infinity, when there is no demand
for anything else, and no other means of supply.
That is to say, to drop the
metaphor, the capital value of the plant of civilisation is
as much dependent for its value on the existence of an
effective demand for its product as it is on its capacity to
meet that demand. If this is grasped, it will be clear that
the distribution of the credit-capital, the power to draw on
the resources of real capital (the leverage of civilisation
on the work of society) increases the value of capital by
the ratio which the new output bears to the old output, a
proposition which clearly has nothing to do with the ad-
ministration of the plant itself. The only way, therefore,
to get that increased production of the things which
individuals really want, which as here defined everyone may
agree is desirable, is to get increased effective demand,
which, as we have seen, we do not get under the present
financial and price system by any general increase in
manufacturing.
CHAPTER XI
Fitness the qualification
for executive authority The producers not the owners of
the product Solar energy the great producer The method
of policy- control The Producers' Bank Its operation
The consumer -interest in it The community -component of
credit How it would operate in the coal industry The "
Idle Rich."
CHAPTER XI
WE may sum up the foregoing arguments by saying, firstly,
that the only claim which any individual or collection of
individuals has to operate and administer the plant of
society is that they are the fittest persons available for
the purpose. This can only be the case where there is
natural attraction between a man and his work, because no
man or woman ever excelled at any pursuit for which they
entertained a dislike when in competition with numbers of
persons who added to equal capacity, an affinity for their
occupation. Secondly, that as the operators, though vital to
the result, are only one of the factors contributing to the
result and by no means the most difficult
factor to replace, they are not, as operators, concerned
with either what is produced, who produces it, or who gets
it when it is collectively compose society.
The absolutely fundamental reason for the existence of
modern co-operative collective production is the belief of
individuals that their interest is best so served.
When or if that belief fails, as
it is failing now, either it must be restored or collective
production will fail, as it failed in Russia.
Now, there is no reasonable
ground what- ever for suggesting that modern productive
methods are not incomparably more efficient than
individualistic hand production.
It is not meant to say by this
that the results of the modern industrial system are at
present more satisfactory than those possible under
medievalism, but that they could be. The essential factor
which places the matter beyond doubt is the introduction of
natural, solar energy into the work of the world, through
the agency of coal, water-power, internal combustion
engines, and other agencies of energy-conversion.
It is, therefore, not the operation of the plant but the
purposes for which it is operated which are chiefly at
fault, and it is over these purposes, the policy of
production, that we are chiefly concerned to acquire
control. Imagine a bank formed by the employees of one of
the great producing industries, by the simple process of
hiring a building and engaging a trained staff, and that all
the wages and salaries of the operating side of this
industry were paid through this bank an operation of
sufficient magnitude to place an ordinary banking business
on a firm foundation at once. Such a bank, backed by the
economic power of a Trade Union on which it might rely,
might claim with success that, as representing one of the
factors of production, and consequently one of the factors
in the credit attaching to production, it should issue a
considerable and agreed pro- portion of the flow of
purchasing-power which forms the vehicle of that credit.
This would take two forms the provision of short-term loans
for current business, and of irredeemable loans for capital
expansion. Now, it should be clear from what has been said
that such a bank would control policy in the proportion that
its financing operations control the productive
organisations obliged to come to it for money.
Imagine each client of this bank to have one share and one
vote at a shareholders' meeting, the object of such meetings
being to afford an opportunity to discuss the action taken
by the bank's officials in their use of the bank's financing
powers, not to discuss the bank's own financial success, for
such a bank as is suggested should pay no dividend. It
should be observed, and it is vital to a grasp of the
principle involved, that this bank is solely concerned, like
all other finance, with economic policy, not with the
administration of economic process. Consider what happens in
the relations between these financing banks and the
productive organisations or companies which they will
admittedly control.
The management of a producing
company, with the aid of its expert technical knowledge,
will initiate a programme of production, and will submit
this programme with estimates of its cost to the banks. The
banks are not concerned with any questions of either
practicability, method of achievement, or any other
questions dependent on technical knowledge they are simply
concerned to give a quick answer to a plain question: " Will
you pledge the com- munity to pay so much for so many
articles, delivered at such a rate of delivery, commencing
on so-and-so date ?" If the banks say yes, they pledge the
credit of the com- munity to that extent exactly as they do,
uncontrolled, at present, because each issue of credit
dilutes the purchasing-power of every existing unit of
purchasing-power, per se, a dilution which is only cancelled
by the actual cancellation of that purchasing- power. If
cancellation takes place by the recovery of this credit from
the public through the agency of prices, then the public
interest is to keep prices low, while, under existing
conditions, the producers' interest is to keep them high.
Now, since our imaginary bank is founded in the first place
on a Trade Union, which is a union of producers, it is
clearly vital to know whether its shareholders will support
a consumers' policy or what seems superficially a producers'
policy.
Let us abandon at once any sentimental ideas which are based
on " a change of heart." What we want to know is, " How will
a body of men whose fundamental reason for association is
goods, not work, act under certain specified conditions,
which we want to arrange in the general interest ?"
Consider two alternative policies to be before, say, a
miners' bank. One raises the price of coal while raising the
remuneration of the miners, the other lowers the price of
coal. The miners are producers of coal, but they are
consumers of forty-nine other articles into which the cost
of coal enters, so that while the miners would receive more
for their product, they would pay more for all other
products. The question we have to answer is, " On which side
does their advantage lie?" and the solution is concerned
with the dynamic nature of industry the constant movement of
all the factors in it.
Remembering that all money, whether for wages or salaries,
paid to induce people to produce is an advance of financial
credit in respect of future production, we can see that if
this advance had no effect on present prices the miners
would benefit at the ex- pense of the public. But since,
under existing conditions, this additional pur- chasing-power
released against the existing stock of goods raises their
price at once (just as we know that building a new rail- way
bridge will raise the price of bacon at the nearest village
shop), the advantage is very temporary, and is absolutely
reversed in the case of the individual who has any stock of
money.
But infinitely more important is the real credit aspect
which is also essentially dynamic. When a miner raises coal,
which is a vehicle of solar energy, he increases the real
capital of the community, its increased capacity to deliver
goods and services, out of all proportion to the " cost " of
raising it. Consequently, as a consumer, he should receive
goods at some future date much cheaper as a result of
raising this coal, i.e., in order to get value for his money
the price of the articles he buys with it must be diminished
by the credit -value of the work he does. Anyone familiar
with the mathematical conception of an acceleration will
grasp the point without difficulty.
When coal is raised in the community, the credit of the
community is increased, not by the cost of raising the coal
i.e., the money value of the work done but by the increased
capacity of the community to deliver goods and services of
the desired variety to individuals composing the community ;
and this credit- value is dependent on the use made of the
coal when it is raised, and may be out of all proportion to
the cost of raising it. The chief component in this credit-
value is supplied by the com- munity itself. There is no
useful purpose served by raising coal in the middle of the
Sahara unless you can either get it to the community or
popularise the Sahara as a manufacturing or social centre.
There- fore, remembering that the cost in wages and salaries
is simply a financial credit- issue, no matter where it
comes from, i.e., just as the banker advances credit to the
employer, so does the employer advance credit against future
production to the employee it is obvious that as a major
part of the real credit involved in the operation is
dependent on the use made of the coal by the community, it
is fundamentally impossible for the cost, which is incurred
prior to use, to be the equivalent of this credit, i.e., no
private employer could ever pay such wages, and recoup them
in prices from the public, as would represent an issue of
purchasing-power representing the credit created by the
proper use of the coal. In any such transaction, for it to
be effective as a distributing agency, there must be an
issue of purchasing-power from some organ representing the
creation of credit by the mere presence of the community
i.e., the total purchasing-power should exceed the cost to
the extent that the total net capacity of society to achieve
its desires is enhanced by the operation in question.
Overdrafts and similar
transactions by banks represent, to a limited degree, such
an issue, and without them production is impossible.
This is the same thing as to say
that price to an ultimate consumer should be that proportion
of cost which is represented by the ratio of credit-
destruction to credit- production, and as the
credit-production is a function of the community, it is
quite clear that the credit production and de- struction
must be generalised you cannot say that a ton of coal raised
will represent so much credit- consumption when it is burnt,
because some obscure professor may devise a method of using
coal which at any moment may double its usefulness. The
vital and somewhat unfamiliar element which it is necessary
to bear steadily in mind in the examination of this subject
is its dynamic character that all the time there is a
ceaseless flow of credit-production arising out of countless
moral, intellectual, and material factors, and a similar but
fundamentally smaller drain on this production which can be
described as depreciation, and the real general ratio of the
generalised income to the generalised expenditure must take
account of all these factors. When, as at present, a whole
civilisation is profoundly dissatisfied with its economic
system, an element of depreciation is introduced which has
far more influence on real credit than the most colossal
destruction of material property by fire or otherwise.
If it can be made clear to the individuals whom we are
placing by hypothesis in control of the policy of the mining
industry that each of them, as individuals, benefits by an
increase of the ratio of credit-production to
credit-consumption, we shall bring individual interest
plainly into line with the general interest, and so, apart
from other factors, enormously expand real credit.
The one aspect of the economic system which is admittedly
and clearly of interest to all individuals is price, and if,
therefore, the miners can affect general prices in favour of
the consumer without injuring themselves, we can rely on
them as reason- able human beings to use their power to
further such a consummation. Let us suppose the price of all
commodities, including coal, bought for beneficial use by an
individual consumer, to be equal to the cost of production
multiplied by a fraction representing credit-consumption
divided by credit-production, but that the price of coal
bought for further production to be equal to cost simply;
then the miners' clear interest as consumers is to create as
much credit as possible for a minimum cost of production,
because the cost of co,l goes into the price of everything
else bought, and these prices are only lowered to the
consumer by the creation of real credit dependent, inter
alia, on the use made of the coal. In everyday language,
then, such a control as we are suggesting would operate
towards the raising of the maximum amount of coal, at the
minimum cost per ton, up to a limit where, in the judgment
of the public acting through their expert officials in the
banks, the credit-production per unit of coal raised was a
maximum.
After this point difficulties
would be placed in the way of further coal production, and
the man-hours of labour absorbed by the mining industry
would begin to decrease and the relation of
credit-production to cost would increase i.e., the industry
would produce the same amount of real purchasing-power for
distribution amongst its members through the agency of
dividends with less work, wages, and salaries. It will at
once be said by the dogmatic Socialist: "Yes, we thought it
would turn out that the idle rich would benefit !" He is
quite right, but let us see exactly who are going to be the
" idle " rich.
The bank we are discussing, let it be clearly borne in mind,
is not a mining company, it is a bank which we postulate
shall finance in increasing proportion a group of mining
companies, and be con- trolled and exist in the interest of,
in the first place, those actively engaged in the mining
industry. Now, by its issues of credit to these producing
companies, it would eventually become possessed of most of
their shares, which it would hold for the benefit of its
depositors. Assuming a standard rate of dividend and an
increasing number of shares due to successive
"capitalisation, " the depositors of this bank would be the
beneficiaries equally of all the increasing number of shares
held by the bank; so that as improvements in process
displaced men from industry the purchasing - power they had
helped to create would be available in the form of
dividends. The mining industry would thus not have to
consider the provision of employment its sole preoccupation
would be the delivery of coal in the right quantity to the
right order the order of the public, acting on the best
advice available.
Those persons whose aptitude for the work was
least would be displaced from the industry first ; and in
the earlier stages of the new order, the desire for
remuneration in addition to that provided by their
dividends, and in the later stages, the necessity to find an
outlet for their creative activity, would drive such persons
to seek fresh fields of usefulness a process of readjustment
clearly tending to the very highest efficiency in the
broadest sense, that resulting from the increasing
suitability of individual and employment.
The liberties of
our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are
worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend
them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair
inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them
for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and
blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence.
It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present
generation, enlightened as it is, if we shold suffer them to
be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or be
cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing
men.
--
Samuel Adams, 1771
Farrakhan
2012 or sooner
Populist Nationalist
Social Credit
Brotherhood
of American Citizen Peacemakers
of All Races
and Creeds -- This is our
Common Ground!!!
It's time for American blacks to
decide whether they want to follow the half-white foreign
president who doesn't have a drop of American negro blood in him
and his black Zionist Harvard professor friend and return racism
for racism, exploitation for exploitation, or whether they want
to follow Farrakhan (and Jesus) and return good for evil,
justice for exploitation, and making things right where the
morally weaker white folks have failed.
"Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide;
In the strife of Truth with falsehood, for the
good or evil side;
Some great
cause, God's new Messiah, offering each the
bloom or
blight,
Parts the goats
upon the left hand and the sheep upon the
right,
And the choice
goes by forever 'twixt that darkness and
that light."
-- Lowell
Slavery Reparations
by Fred Reed
On the
Web, I find that Henry Louis Gates Jr., the chairman of
Afro-American Studies at Harvard, is demanding that whites pay
reparations to blacks. It's because of slavery, see. He is
joined in this endeavour by a gaggle of other professional
blacks. I guess he'll send me a bill, huh?
I feel like saying, "Let me get this straight, Hank. I'm slow.
Be patient.
You want free money because of slavery, right? I don't blame
you." I'd like free money, too. Tell you what. I believe in
justice. I'll give you a million dollars for every slave I own,
and another million for every year you were a slave. Fair
enough? But, tell me, how many slaves do you suppose I
have? In round numbers, I mean...say to the nearest dozen.
And how long were you a slave?
Oh. In other words, I owe you reparations for something that I
didn't do and didn't happen to you. That makes sense. Like lug
nuts on a birthday cake.
Personally, I think you owe me reparations for things you didn't
do and never happened to me. I've never been coated in Dutch
chocolate and thrown from the Eiffel Tower. I'll bet you've
never done it to anyone. I want reparations. Kind of silly,
isn't it?
But if we're going to talk about reparations, that's a street
that runs in two directions. You want money from me for what
some other whites did to some other blacks in another century?
How about you guys paying whites reparations for current
expenses caused by blacks? Not long ago, blacks burned down
half of Los Angeles, a city in my country. Cities are
expensive, Hank. Build one sometime and you'll see what I
mean. Whites had to pay taxes to repair Los Angeles for you.
You can send me a check.
Now, yes, I know you burned LA because you didn't like the
verdict in the trial of those police officers. Well, I didn't
like the verdict in the Simpson trial.
But I
didn't burn my house and loot Korean grocers, or burn down a
city.
Over the years,
blacks have burned a lot of American cities: Newark, Detroit,
Watts, on and on. Now add in the fantastic cost over the years
of welfare in all its forms, the cost of all of those police
calls people had to make, for cells and jails and security
systems in department stores.
I can't live in
the capital city of my own country because of crime committed by
blacks. Toss in the cultural cost of lowering standards
in everything for the benefit of blacks. See what I mean?
Now, I'd view
things differently if you said to me, "Fred, blacks can't
get anywhere in a modern country without education. We know
that. We need better schools, smarter teachers, harder courses,
books with smaller pictures and bigger words. Can you help us?"
I'd say,
"Hallelujah! Hoo-ahh! Not just yes, but hell yes. Let's sell
an aircraft carrier and get these folks some real schools and
get them into the economic main-stream.' I'd say It partly
because it would be the right thing to do, and partly because
I'd like to add you guys to the tax base.
The current
custodial state is expensive. I'd just love for blacks to
study and learn to compete and stop burning places. But is it
going to happen? You may not believe it, but I, and most
whites, don't like seeing blacks as miserable and screwed up
as they are.
I spend a fair
amount of time in the projects. Those places are ugly. It's no
fun watching perfectly good kids turn into semi-literate dope
dealers who barely speak English. It just plain ain't right.
But, Hank, what am I supposed to do about it? I can't do your
children's homework. At some point, people have to do things
for themselves, or they don't get done. Maybe it's time.
I'll tell you what
I see out in the world, Hank... I think blacks are
too accustomed to getting anything they want by just demanding
it. True, it has worked for over half a century. Get a few
hundred people in the street, implicitly threaten to loot and
burn, holler about slavery, and sadly the Great White Cash
Spigot turns on.
Thing
is, whites don't much buy it any longer. Most recognize that
what once was a civil-rights movement has become a shakedown
game. Few people still feel responsible for the failings and
inadequacies of blacks. Political correctness keeps the lid on
-- but everyone knows the score. Which
scares me, Hank.
On one hand, blacks hate whites and incline toward looting and
burning. (The whites you hate are the ones who marched in the
civil-rights movement. Ever think about that?)
On the other hand, whites quietly grow wearier and wearier of
it. Not good, Hank.
On the third hand (allow me three hands, for rhetorical
convenience), blacks keep demanding things. As I write, you
demand reparations for slavery. Blacks in Oklahoma (I think
it was) want money for some ancient race riot.
Other blacks reject the Declaration of Independence. Blacks in
New York hint broadly at burning and looting over a trial, yet
more demand the elimination of the Confederate flag, and the
federal equal opportunity apparatus, which means blacks want to
sue Silicon Valley for not hiring nonexistent black engineers.
That's a lot of demanding for one month, Hank.
What happens if whites ever say, "No"?
Now, how about you? You've got a cushy job up there at Harvard,
and you can hoot and holler about what swine and bandits whites
are. I guess it's lots of fun, and you get a salary for it to
boot. But don't you think you might do blacks more good if you
told them to complain less and study more?
For example, if you want blacks to work in Silicon Gulch, the
best approach might be to find some really smart black guys, and
get them to study digital design ~ not Black Studies (as you
teach). That's how everybody else does it. It works. Then,
blacks wouldn't feel left out, and racial tensions
would decline. Sound like a plan?
Just out of curiosity, how many hours a week do professors of
Afro-American Studies spend in the projects, encouraging poor
black kids to study real-life sho-nuf subjects?
"With all these blessings,
what more is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous
people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens -- a wise and
frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring
one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to
regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and
shall not take from the mouth of labor the breat it has
earned. This is the sum of good government. . . --
Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
"I tell you that freedom does
not mean the freedom to exploit law in order to destroy it.
It is not freedom which permits the Trojan Horse to be
wheeled within the gates, and those within it to be heard in
the name of tolerating a different point of view! He who is
not for Rome and Roman law and Roman liberty is against
Rome. He who espouses tyranny and oppression and the old
despotism is against Rome. He who plots against established
authority and incites the populace to violence is against
Rome. He cannot ride two horses at the same time; He cannot
be for lawful ordinances and for an alien conspiracy at one
and the same moment! One is a Roman or not a Roman!
-- Cicero, 43 B.C.
"The honor and safety of
our bleeding country, and every other motive that can
influence the brave and heroic patriot, call loudly upon us,
to acquit ourselves with spirit. In short, we must now
determine to be enslaved or free. If we make freedom our
choice, we must obtain it by the blessing of Heaven on our
united and vigorous efforts."
-- George Washington,
August 8, 1776
Every man
is responsible to every other man.
|