Social Credit is as old as man

Notes on the Social Credit Philosophy
In view of the growing number of people who have in recent times made their first contact with Social Credit as a result of becoming readers of this journal, we feel that the following notes of an address by Geraldine Starky to an English Toc H branch will prove most helpful - not only to new readers, but also to old readers.

Social Credit is as old as man. There are more examples of it in Great Britain than in Tibet or Timbuktu but neither here nor there is legitimate use made of the social credit of the people. Social Credit is the belief that in association we can get the results we want, and this naturally implies the best and happiest results. This definition implies then, efficiency, human satisfactions and society. Social Credit is "the efficiency measured in terms of human satisfaction of human beings in association or in society." Study these words and the student will discover that so far from being a belief or a religion or a theory Social Credit if it is what the definition indicates, must be a fact. You may decide now whether human beings have or have not any such power to produce a result they intend to produce when helping each other. If they have no such power Social Credit does not exist: if they have, it does.

If we decide that human beings inevitably help each other to produce a result which they do not want and do not intend and do not find satisfactory, then we had better give up-we have nothing to study. We study these words and we are agreed that human beings tend inevitably to help each other to produce results, which they desire. Social Credit then is a fact, not a theory.

The original meaning of the word credit is simply belief, and social means association or society. And let us be careful to use words in their proper meaning for we shall then not be so easily led astray "by every word or vain doctrine."

Through the ages man's genius and needs have urged him to effort towards his development. Man needed tools and the help of his fellows, and it is by such associations that he has found his best means of progress. Man has an instinctive desire for fulfilment and a deep-seated knowledge that he is placed here for his development. He has created the social credit. It ought not to be so difficult for him to satisfy those needs to get delivery of the goods, nor should it be too difficult for him to recognise that the reward of the ages of his evolving is within sight; his material reward, for he has the tools, and there is "enough" for all. And it is unlikely that until these material needs have been satisfied and he finds himself "prospered with all happiness" that he will be able to turn his mind to his unlimited spiritual needs and hopes, for man does not live by bread alone.

We may ask why this progress is to such an extent frustrated
The real conflict with which we are faced today is a conflict of philosophies. Underneath all the diplomacy, the deputations, the Conferences, the misunderstandings, the recriminations, is a conflict of Philosophies. Now, all action, every policy, is born from a philosophy. Every action has the thought behind it from which it originates. "Out of the heart the mouth speaketh." We have an exhibition today of the thought which engenders such policies as Hitler's Nazi-ism or National Socialism, and those similar to it, namely Bolshevism, Communism, and those like it with all their regimentation and revenge. While they claim to be for man's good, they are in reality damaging to his inherent right to rule himself, which Major Douglas calls man's immanent sovereignty. They are revengeful policies.
We fought two desperate wars hard won to destroy the threat to our National and Individual Sovereignty exemplified and implied in these philosophies and the Policies which are their natural result. Major Douglas foresaw this, now over forty years ago, when his first and great work was published in which he solved the problem the orthodox economists had failed to do. This great work made history, and was called "Economic Democracy." In it he wrote: - " . . . the real antagonism which is at the root of the upheaval with which we are faced is one which appears under different forms in every aspect of life. It is the life-long struggle between freedom and authority.....This antagonism does, however, appear at the present time to have reached a stage in which a definite victory for one side or another is inevitable - it seems perfectly certain that either a pyramidal organization having at its apex supreme power, and at its base complete subjection, will crystallize out of the centralising process which is evident in the realms of finance and industry, equally with that of politics, or else a more complete decentralisation of initiative than this civilisation has ever known will be substituted for external authority. . ."

And it is fitting that we should pause a moment here to remind ourselves of Major C. H. Douglas the well-known Engineer and authority of the New Economics, founder of the Social Credit Movement. In the 1914-1918 War he volunteered and was given work connected with costing in the manufacture of aircraft, and discovered that money distributed every week was not enough to defray the expenses of manufacture. He discovered - and I want to spell the word "dis-covered" because much of the inner workings of the Finanicial System had till then been hidden from view - Douglas discovered more than that, then, but that is the essence of the matter, and he proposed a remedy. He also elaborated the Social Credit philosophy, of which his book already mentioned, namely "Economic Democracy," may be said to be the epitome.

A philosophy then, is shown in actions, in policy, and Douglas warns us that we should judge all things by the results of them, and men by their actions, for only in this realistic way may we gain an insight into the thought or philosophy behind them. He reminded us that the Great Critic of world affairs said: "By their works ye shall know them." We have seen the results of a Nazi, a Fascist philosophy, the results of Bolshevik, the now-a-day's Communistic, thought. And here it is necessary to stress, as did Douglas throughout his Mission, the importance of basing our policies - as our Politics - on a Christian basis; a Christian philosophy, and allow and welcome our actions as well as the results - particularly as Social Crediters - to be judged by that standard.

In the Christian philosophy then, the individual is of deepest importance: "Ye are of more value than many sparrows"; there must be no distinctions - "the rain falls on the just and on the unjust", on King as on peasant, on rich as on poor, on sinner as on saint; and as all have contributed to the social credit all must share it.
Let us consider some of the principles of a Christian philosophy which are common to Social Credit, and the following passages and Gospel sayings have been taken at random from Social Credit literature - and I will try to show how Douglas uses the Gospels, as he frequently does, to illustrate his writings, speeches, and books.

"I came that ye might have life and that more abundantly." In this there is nothing said about work or that he came to ensure that paradise of so many today, at the instigations of Governments, the "policy of making employment universal, not of producing wealth with a minimum of work." (You noticed perhaps that this represented the tenets of the Laval-Nazi policy prior to the Second World War). Work is of course a means to an end and not an end. We, as Social Crediters, are careful not to exalt means to the place of ends and so be led astray in our thinking, for as Douglas reminds us "Daemon est Deus in versus" or, the Devil is God upside down.

"The Kingdom of Heaven is within you." His Kingdom is not to be found in this or that plan or in this or that Institution invented by the well-meaning for what is considered by them to be for another's good, "It is within you." Though this gives to each of us a responsibility, it frees us from well-meaning (no doubt) thralldom, it lets us go free.
We pray, "O God, in knowledge of Whom standeth our eternal life, Whose service is perfect freedom . . .", but according to some, the "new freedom" will not be freedom from dependence, (on others), or from interference, (from others), no, it is to mean "freedom of opportunity", and of "lesser freedom" so as to enjoy the "greater". As to "freedom of opportunity" we may well ask: For what? To know God "in knowledge of Whom standeth our eternal life"? -"No", we are told, "but freedom of opportunity to work." -"As far as I am aware, the slave was always free to work," comments Douglas.

"The sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath." Surely this is a plain injunction that institutions should serve man, that man should be master of the machine, of his institutions, for he is greater than they.
There is only one commandment - Love. And I will quote from "The Social Crediter" of January 18, 1941: "The difficulty is to present our philosophy as a whole. It is so easy to magnify one aspect of it out of relation to the rest. When for instance we observed the tendency of the 'Parents' Association' to 'put things right,' and their assertion that loving your neighbour means 'working for him' according to your own ideas of what is good for him, we should remember that these amiable intentions are closely linked with a belief in the 'innate tendencies to barbarism' in the human race. This idea is incompatible with Social Credit."

"Love thy neighbour." There is no suggestion in this commandment of Planning for my neighbour, rising to power over my neighbour, applying sanctions to my erring neighbour; all of which are excused by the well-intentioned as being for our good. When Major Douglas spoke at Buxton on "Democracy" (the world so often misapplied) he there proclaimed his belief in the innate goodness of man, and he would refuse to accept as truth "the innate tendencies to barbarism" which a certain set of people today would have us believe are common to man, and on which they would have us base our philosophy and so, our policy today.

"He that is greatest among you let him be your servant", and I will again quote from "The Social Crediter:" "Perhaps the greatest difficulty we have is to show that our philosophy is not just a stunt. We cannot make it too clear that loving your neighbour does not mean working for him in the sense understood by the Parents' Association. It may mean taking orders from him. And it certainly does mean leaving him alone with his personality, leaving him free. For those who aspire to be great there is of course open - to humble ourselves to be servants - and this means taking orders and carrying them out to the best of our ability. It means accepting and implementing the policy of the people, not preparing an agenda and placing it before them."

"The sabbath was made for man", yes, and those words imply not only man's importance above his institutions, but that his institutions are only justified in so far as they serve him. This Social Credit philosophy then, is based on the importance of the individual, and this embraces what Douglas calls "man's immanent sovereignty" his in-dwelling right to rule himself which must be preserved if he is to reach that end which although unknown, he feels to be his crown! The preservation of the dignity of the individual is of vital importance, for his "author and maker is God."
Now while there is a place in the social economy for all, it is not suggested that "the man in the street" shall decide how the hole in the street is to be mended, but he wants it mended, and the expert who is engaged must produce the result desired, or go. To decide policy is not the function of the management; the expert. The aristocracy or hierarchy of management should give the desired result - that is, to carry out the policy of the democracy - of the people. This is how a democracy should function, and in it we have a simple example of the aristocracy of management, the Master, serving.

"I came that ye might have life and that more abundantly." Can we if we are Christians avoid criticisms of anything, which hinders a free, dignified and fuller life for all? For such is possible. The Social Credit philosophy claims it for al l- the Kings, the people, the peasant, the publicans and the sinners. The Douglas Financial Proposals for instance, are an example of the policy of the philosophy underlying them, because, they are not confiscatory proposals, they do not rob Peter to pay Paul, they are not Debt and Taxation proposals, but are in keeping with Social Credit preaching, and the results will be in keeping with Social Credit philosophy. The proposals claim for us our inheritance of the social credit, the reward of long ages of toil: simply it claims for us our credit.
Banal as it sounds, there is no Liberty without Economic Freedom, and Douglas has defined Liberty as "freedom to choose or refuse ONE thing at a time." (The writer's emphasis). The National Dividend which is claimed for all would end for most their material disabilities and limitations. While such remain there is no freedom in the Social Credit sense.

We can only touch here on the evils brought about by a non-Christian philosophy, but it is now well-known if not acknowledged - that a faulty-no-good, won't-work-system of Economics which of course includes Finance, is one of the causes of War if not the chief. It is a cause of war in every village, of trouble in every workshop. The trend today is for centralisation - its brand is everywhere - and this is incompatible with Social Credit philosophy, which favours the individual and encourages his initiative. For the much better results, which come from such a free mind, we have evidence today and on the battlefields of the last Great War.
Which of us has not seen many examples of this divine quality of personal initiative, divine spirit, of man's creative impulses unrealised, discouraged, trodden down, frustrated till it was quenched, and the men in whom it once dwelt saddened, dispirited, often ruined in calculated and quite unmerited rain.

We call for a policy built on the living foundations of the bountiful and beneficial laws of Nature, in Economics and Finance, the way the Universe works, the way the Engineers, the bridge-builder the Architect has to. We are led to believe that rather than correct the faulty functioning of civilized life to reflect Reality - and the teachings of Jesus has shown us the way - the only alternative to repeated war or the astonishing and unnecessary paradox of poverty amid plenty, is to be found in schemes such as Federal Union, The Police State, United Nations Organisations, each of which is instituted "to put things right", the fundamentals of which is the intensification of centralised government, and "the sacrifice of our National and individual sovereignty", and, to a "central Authority", (but who this is or to whom answerable is not stated; "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes."). You will agree that these are grave threats. They are totally incompatible with Social Credit.

I will close with a quotation from Frank Lloyd Wright the distinguished architect: "I believe man's nature is still sound, and recognise that science has done well, but I know that science cannot save us. Science has given us miraculous tools but what use are they unless we have mastered the cultural use of them in man's relation to man? We do not want to live in a world where the machine has mastered the man, we want to live in a world where man is master of the machine."
And Major Douglas would add "and of the institution which should serve him."

The great Disciple wrote: "Prove all things" and his Master said: "The truth shall make you free."