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
 
 
 

Feder

 

(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 billionReckoned 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
 
 

 

Programme of the Party of Hitler, the NSDAP and its General Conceptions (1932)    Complete text here:
http://www.archive.org/download/ProgrammeOfThePartyOfHitlerTheNsdapAndItsGeneralConceptions/NSDAP.pdf
 

 
 
 
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
 
 

 

 

 

 

Gesell

 
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.
 
 
 
 

Kitson and Douglas

 

 
 
“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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revised: July 18, 2010 .   Communication:   discoverer73(at symbol)hotmail.com     Go to Home Page     Go to Index of All Articles Pages       
Read the
Disclaimer
Last modified: July 18, 2010  Copyright © 1999 - 2008  All rights reserved. [Gnostic Liberation Front].   www.gnosticliberationfront.com