New Times Survey
A Patchwork Put Together For Your Consideration
Holy Week 2008
Life in the Word
: "All things were made through the Word, but that which was made in the Word
was life, and that life is the light of men: they who live by this light, that
is live as Jesus lived, by obedience, namely, to the Father, have a share in their
own making; the light becomes life in them; they are, in their lower way, alive
with the life that was first born in Jesus, and through Him has been born in them
- by obedience they become one with the Godhead: 'As many as received Him, to
them gave He power to become the sons of God.' "
Doctrine of the Incarnation : "With some hesitation, I suggest that the question
arising out of the Christian Church, is not the same, either in nature or degree,
as that involved in the acceptance of what is vaguely called Christianity which
for the most part is merely Liberal Judaism. It is the Doctrine of the Incarnation.
Christian Political Moralism : "If our church leaders and theologians wish
to give us a lead on the morality of politics, we look to them to go deeply and
carefully into it, showing us precisely and impartially just how and where good
purposes become corrupted, and how the corruption may be prevented or eliminated.
We hope, but mostly in vain, for something more worthy of respect than mere partisan
Leftism, attacking the whole policy indiscriminately, the good with the evil.
Within : "Perhaps we have missed the meaning of Christ's promise that when
two or three are gathered together in His name, there will the divine Spirit prevail
Tolkien's Social Philosophy
: "I am not a 'democrat', Tolkien wrote in 1956: "only because 'humility'
and equality are spiritual principles corrupted by the attempt to mechanise and
formalise them, with the result that we get not universal smallness and humility,
but universal greatness and pride, till some Orc gets hold of a ring of power
- and then we get and are getting slavery
Ruled by Counterfeits
: "True aristocracy, after true religion, is the greatest blessing a nation
can enjoy. Early nineteenth-century Britain possessed an unrivalled capacity for
aristocracy. Her troubles arose because she was ruled by a counterfeit instead
of the real aristocracy which her institutions had evolved with such profusion
Eli, Eli : He could not see, could not feel Him near; and yet it is 'My God' that He cries. Thus the will of Jesus, in the very moment when His faith seems about to yield is finally triumphant. It has no feeling now to support it, no beatific vision to absorb it. It stands naked in His soul and tortured, as He stood naked and scourged before Pilate. Pure and simple and surrounded by fire, it declares for God.
: This is the Faith of the Son of God. God withdrew, as it were, that the
perfect Will of the Son might arise and go forth to find the Will of the Father.
It is possible that even He thought of the lost sheep who could not believe that
God was their Father; and for them, too, in all their loss and blindness and unlove,
cried, saying the word they might say, knowing for them that God means Father
Development of Common Law and Social Credit
by Wallace Klinck, Canada
There are many folk who do not seem to know (or perhaps agree with) the historical development of the Common Law, in which judicial precedent plays such a major role. One interesting account of this is Dr. Arthur R. Hogue's "Origins of the Common Law," first published in 1966 by the Indiana University Press, more recently reprinted in 1985 by the Liberty Press Inc. in Indiana. I can readily understand the cause for many grievances regarding the legal and banking systems but I think we have to be careful in our responses in taking up the challenge to correct their deficiencies (perversions and no doubt depredations).
We have had "natural law" people in the U.S. and Canada who seem to have resorted to certain means whereby to eliminate their burdens of personal debts (to which they rightly object) by intimidating legal devices which seem designed to abrogate these debts at the expense of others. I question the practicality, equity and ethics of such tactics while agreeing with the wrongness of the expanding and ultimately unrepayable debts which hang as an albatross around our necks.
only proper Social Policy
Makes Christ's teachings identifiable
"Works are as filthy rags," etc. The rain falls on the just and the unjust. The invitation "come, let us reason" establishes the basis for honest enquiry--the basis of truly scientific study and advancement with the abundance, physical, cultural and spiritual, which results.
I am sure vast treatises could be written on the subject--although the basic principles should be clear and accessible to nearly all persons (where "a fool cannot err"?). The rejection of temporal power is profound, i.e., "Get behind me Satan" when Christ was tempted by the offer of dominion over the nations of the earth.
Cook, Social Credit
by James Reed
We are living in end times
in an economic sense. Household debt in Australia has now crashed through
the $1 trillion level. At this point it looks to be going into freefall. Richard
C. Cook, "BIG" author has put on the net "An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform
for the United States." He sees looming economic chaos that in turn will produce
a worldwide breakdown in social order and law and order. The private control of
credit has, he observes, given almost total power to the Money Power to control
the lives and destiny of men. The answer is Social Credit, Mr. Cook rightly observes,
a movement away from the centralisation of financial power towards greater economic
democracy, a greater sharing of the riches and bounty of the economy.
Major Douglas' National Dividend was an expression of the productive capacity of the society, expressed as the nation's "real credit" - the ability of society using technology, science, brain power and human resources to produce goods and services. Real credit, in the economic sense, is the productive potential of a society and it can most certainly be contrasted with 'financial credit', such as loans issued by banks. As Cook puts it: "A National Dividend would represent the true wealth of the community, the bounty of our incredible GDP (gross domestic product), of which all citizens should be the rightful beneficiaries once the business owners receive a reasonable profit. Again, it's important to realise that Social Credit is not a socialist system. Rather it is 'democratic capitalism', in contrast to the 'finance capitalism' that has become so damaging.
The National Dividend differs from other schemes such as 'basic income guarantee' schemes in that the dividend is linked to production and may vary from year to year. It is unlikely, in modern technologically advanced societies that this would be a problem, with the dividend falling below some critical threshold.
But isn't this too good to be true: wouldn't it lead to inflation? Cook demolishes this often-made argument: "Because a National Dividend would replace bank-credit of the same amount, it would bring the total money supply only up to the level of the GDP. It would not result in 'more dollars chasing the same amount of goods' but would simply bridge the gap. Not only would the National Dividend be non-inflationary, it could even be counter-inflationary by liquidating previous financial costs without creating new ones."
These measures will directly challenge the Money Power. Cook does not address in his paper this most challenging of problems : how to do it. It will be the greatest battle of all time since these ugly folk have caused most wars to consolidate their power. Nevertheless while we engage in the grand counter-conspiracy against the demons of the Money Power, there is still much that individuals can do to spread the word through obtaining literature and distributing it. I always recommend giving League books as presents for almost all occasions.
The Heritage Book Services carry a range of books, DVDs and Videos dealing with the concepts of a National Dividend and the Compensated Price. Send for further details.
There is a saying that when a problem is correctly understood it is already half solved. The reason for our money problem is that it is not understood, and furthermore, the subject is surrounded in a set of beliefs that are largely superstitions and myths. Compared with the advances in some other areas of social development our understanding about money is still stuck in a sort of Dark Ages mysticism, and many of the beliefs we have about money are simply nonsense.
Money and the modern money system are human inventions. They are man-made. When Christopher Columbus came to the Americas and Captain Cook to Australia and New Zealand they did not find any existing systems of money, nor did they bring ship loads of dollars. At some point in each of our countries, human beings established these systems and created some money, and over time our societies and farming and industry and commerce began to develop and expand to meet people's needs.
Because money is such a dominant factor in our society it is easy to understand why, in our minds, we often think of it as performing functions and doing things and being something which it is not. There is a common belief that money is created when goods are manufactured or food grown by a farmer; that when a farmer grows $1000 worth of wheat or a manufacturer makes a $million worth of, say, motorcars, these actions of themselves have added to the amount of money available to society. This is why there are regular calls by governments for economic growth, and there is the belief within conventional economic thinking that somehow such growth can go on forever.
But the process of money creation is an entirely different function, carried out by a different organisation altogether. This function is undertaken by the banking system. Not one manufacturer of goods anywhere in the world, nor any farmer, no matter how much real wealth they produce or grow, actually ever creates any money. Even the largest manufacturing company in the world does not produce even one cent, or one lira, or one yen, or one frank or rouble. They manufacture real material goods, not money. Nor does the action of people or countries trading in real goods and services cause the creation of any money. Money is created and made available by the actions of banking institutions. Of course there is a relationship, but the manufacturing and trading of real goods and the issue of money are never-the-less the results of two distinctively different functions by two different groups of people.
a simplified way it happens like this
At the bank's end the provision of this overdraft is an accounting procedure. The provision of the overdraft does not entail reducing other people's accounts, or the bank having to borrow the money itself from elsewhere. Of course, within the world of banking there are various procedures entailing relationships between bank branches and their head offices, something called a wholesale money market, clearing houses for interbank exchanges, and sometimes certain government requirements concerning the holding of what are called reserves. But never-the-less, when the manufacturer draws upon its overdraft facility new money is brought into existence. There is an increase in the total amount of money in that society. And when that overdraft is repaid or reduced there is a reduction in the amount of money then in that society.
We should have no objection to this basic function of the banks. It is an administrative service provided to society. It is a vital function and essential to facilitate the modern systems of production. But there is a serious distortion imposed upon society when those who should be regarded as society's book-keepers hold great power over the functioning of the producers of real goods and services, which results also in enormous political influence. Because there is presently a financial monopoly this influence or power is often directed to encouraging centralisation or monopolisation elsewhere. We see this pressure, which entails both financial pressure and propaganda, at the levels of government and industry. When it comes to industry and farming we are encouraged to believe that bigger is better and will be more efficient. And much the same propaganda is advanced to encourage even the amalgamations of governments into ever larger ones. This pressure is especially influential when people or nations are have financial troubles. But almost always these economic problems result from inadequacies in how the money system functions, not in the abilities of countries to provide for the physical requirements of their people.
If, in fact, centralisation was really more efficient then the old Soviet Union ought to have been the most efficient and satisfying place on the planet.
The proper purpose of having a production system is to meet the requirements of people and efficiency should be a measure of human satisfaction. This is not to deny the need for large enterprises. It depends on what people as individuals and in association want. If we want large jet airliners or ships then these cannot be made in back-yard workshops. But it is surely grossly inefficient, and no doubt less healthy too, for food and many other items to be transported thousands of miles when they often can be made or grown in the areas where they are required.
Real Cost Versus Financial Cost
It has been society as a whole that has provided the food and other material needs consumed by the workers in the shoe factory. Others have been responsible for providing the raw materials and their transportation, others the infrastructure of roads, electricity and communication services.
By distinguishing between the real physical costs of making things and the financial measurement of these costs we will save ourselves a great deal of difficulty.
This will allow us to distinguish between the real physical world and the world of money. The physical world is the world we can touch and see; the earth with its wonderful beauty and enormous provisions; the existing infrastructures in our countries of houses and shops and factories, roads, power stations, electrical transmission lines, communication and transportation systems; highly developed systems of management and production, governmental systems, facilities for research and invention, and so much more. All these things are real wealth. The accounting mechanism called money creates a financial figure by which we can put a measure on these things for the purposes of reward and exchanges between people and organizations, and, most importantly, the distribution of manufactured goods as, when and wherever required by people.
Do We Produce?
This raises a huge philosophical question concerning how we see ourselves and others. Are we economic units or is the purpose of our lives and of everyone else of something of greater significance which requires the greatest possible individual freedom and opportunity for personal growth or development?
This is really a spiritual issue, but it can't be divested from a discussion of the role of money in society, because how the money system is structured bears upon how people relate to their social and economic institutions. The need for "full employment", for instance, is a stipulation imposed by demands stemming from the financial system, but these days modern technology could easily allow us to produce all we require with less than half the present working hours.
Every collectivist movement holds to the belief that people are economic units; that their role is to serve and fit into the requirements demanded by The State, or the economic system or some other giant centralised system. This is the belief of the communists and socialists. It was upheld by the German Nazis and the Italian Fascists. And I am sorry to say that it is a belief of monopoly capitalism and in recent centuries too of the more puritanical elements within Christianity. It is really a horrible belief and denies the deeper requirements sought by human nature and which are essential for personal, physical and spiritual development.
And the main tool by which the collectivist inclination is imposed in modern societies is that of monopolised finance. In Stalin's Russia it was primarily guns and prisons. Instead of the financial mechanism being solely a tool to facilitate the needs of industry and consumers it is in great part perverted. It does perform to some extent its rightful function but the monopolised position of those permitted by laws and customs to create money, and to demand the terms upon which it will be made available, has put too much power into the hands of people who are not elected political representatives; it gives them undue influence over government, the media, industry and education; it has caused an enormous and artificial system of unrepayable money debt to be imposed on every sector of society and to every corner of the world.
In the natural physical world there is no such thing as debt. Rain, or next year's wheat crop, cannot be borrowed in advance. We cannot use wood from a tree that is not yet grown. A rectified money system would correctly reflect this. The natural world is one of sufficient and calm abundance.
The pressure to endlessly increase production and trade, with its resultant pollution, wastage of peoples` time and materials, is a financial pressure. It is certainly not a demand of the natural world. It causes a massive production of junk throw-a-way items that get transported over thousands of miles. It causes people everywhere and their families and towns and cities to be disrupted and stressed by the pressures of money debt. It forces our farmers and business folk to take cost cutting methods and production increases to unnatural excess.
what needs to be done?
Technically, it is a matter of firstly recognising the natural functions of money, of grasping how it presently operates. Then we can see that the money system is not completely wrong. But it needs various corrections.
The money system and its administration needs to be put into its correct place in society. Its natural relationship to society is much the same as the relationship of an accounting department to a large company. The role of the banker is as society's book keeper. It is perfectly ok for these book keepers to be well paid. But it is no more satisfactory for the banking system to claim the ownership of society and its assets than it is for a company's accounting department to claim the complete control, management and ownership of the company.
Technically, to ensure that the satisfactory financing of consumption is done to peoples satisfaction is not really such a giant step. It already happens but in a way that is not satisfactory and ultimately unsustainable.
If we think
of the manufacture of goods in terms of cycles of production it can be shown that
in every cycle of production, industry distributes less purchasing power in the
form of wages, salaries and dividends, than it demands back in prices from society.
Conventional economics mistakenly teaches that industry does distribute sufficient money to society to buy everything produced. But conventional economic doctrine leaves out the factor of time from its equation. There is a part truth that the costs of producing a particular item, say our pair of shoes, has meant that at some time in the present and the past all, or at least most, costs associated with their manufacture have gone to the community as purchasing power. But when we factor in the element of time, it can be clearly shown that in any given period of time, less money is distributed to society than is required to cancel the prices of the goods distributed in that same period.
This is because in the manufacture of something, say our shoes, the manufacturer has other costs besides wages, salaries and distribution of a dividend-profit. These include the purchase of raw materials, depreciation on equipment, repayment and servicing of loans. All of the manufacturer's costs must be built into the final price tag, but less than this has been distributed as purchasing power. It is exactly the same for every business. Any business that is not in this situation is going broke fast.
Without some other factors this would cause commerce to come to a quick stop. So why doesn't it. Because the problem is recognised, even if only in a clumsy and almost unconscious way by government economic advisers and bankers. Hence, there is a huge and continuous flow of new money from the banks that goes directly toward financing consumption. We loosely call it consumer debt. It is provided for consumption via credit cards, personal loans and overdraft facilities, mortgages on the grossly inflated price tags on private properties and various schemes for time payment.
The proper function of a society's book keepers should not only be to ensure the adequate financing of the manufacturing of the products demanded by consumers but to ensure that consumption was also properly financed without leaving a trail of debt long after the goods have been consumed. This is not to suggest that money should be just issued in huge quantities willy-nilly. (Actually it very much is that way now)
The banking or money system is a book-keeping or accounting system. It must be sensibly administered. But it is a book keeping system. Money is figures, numbers. It is a measuring system. The figures are not real wealth. Shoes, and electric kettles and wheat and houses are real wealth. The system of money figures is only a way of measuring this real wealth. This is not to deny that it is a wonderful invention for assisting the smooth functioning of production and the distribution of that production.
Claims that a money system should be based on gold or some other precious metal only demonstrates a lack of appreciation of what money and its function is. Money is required for production. This means money credits are required to be introduced into existence for facilitating - for financing - production. When the particular goods have been consumed that money needs to be withdrawn from existence. This is not complicated. It is just a matter of book keeping and it is largely how the system presently functions.
Presently, money as bank loans is issued for production, a further issue of credit is issued as consumer debt to facilitate the purchasing of at least most production, and when goods are bought the money then flows via the retailer back to the manufacturers and the suppliers of raw materials. These in turn use it for repayment of the original loans, hence the money goes out of existence along with the consumption of the goods.
The present bookkeeping procedures however leave an ever-expanding consumer debt to the private owners of the banks. And large capital expenditures by industry mean that here also are long term loans and high on-going interest charges, which add considerably to the present cost structures. Governments also, instead of exercising their constitutional and natural right to finance public works required by communities out of new credits have gone cap in hand to the banks with the result that extortionist rates of taxation are required to service huge public debts.
interesting study of the money system, and the processes by which money is issued
and withdrawn from circulation was made just after WWI by an English engineer
Cliff Douglas. Unlike a trained economist he was mentally free to study the system
in the same way an engineer might study why a machine was not functioning properly.
The system is after all a basically simply human invention. As an engineer he
realised there was always issued by industry a shortfall in purchasing power and
proposed the payment of a social dividend to every citizen in the producing country
and a price discount on sales.
The easiest way to understand this is to forget momentarily about money and just look at the real physical world. If modern technology allows the increasing use of machines and robots in manufacturing this does not cause any shortage of real goods or wealth. The purpose of making these things is still to meet the requirements of every member of society, and so everyone must be able to get access to these goods whether they were employed at that period or not.
This also recognises that the greatest factor in modern production is something we might call the cultural heritage, or cultural inheritance, which is all the accumulations of knowledge and technology, much of which has been bequeathed to the world by people who are now long dead. Who invented the wheel, or the cogged gear for example? The knowledge about these is now common property.
None of this necessary financial correction threatens private ownership as the socialists advocate. A factory or a lathe is justly the private property of those who have been enterprising or benefited from a family inheritance. But the products of the factory have a more communal nature in that they could not be made without the knowledge behind their manufacture, behind the invention of the lathe, of the huge infrastructure of roads, electricity and communications, the use of which is largely now common property. A social dividend is really the right of all people in the modern world, and as well as providing individual economic security would allow for the much easier development and implementation of further technological developments that give us ever greater economic freedom.
This is the reality of the modern physical world. One that offers great opportunity to all and considerable freedom from economic restraints. But it requires that the banking system occupy its proper function as a book keeping social service, and that will happen when we free our minds from the unfortunate and deadly superstitions and false beliefs that surround money.
The existing money system is highly developed. It does facilitate an enormous and myriad co-operation between people all over the world, but it vitally requires some corrections. If we fail to do this even the future of our civilisation is threatened and we will continue to witness increasing financial insecurity, poverty and want alongside plenty, and even an increase in the wastage of materials and peoples lives, of pollution, of the breakdown of town and cities as governments find it increasing difficult to finance their maintenance.
conclusion I must emphasis that the proposals known as social credit are not a
scheme or plan to relieve poverty. Social Credit is not in fact a scheme at all.
It is a way of seeing things, of seeing the reality of the physical world in which
we live; of getting around the obscurities caused by conventional money-dominated
would of course relieve poverty. It would do much more than this. It would provide
everyone with the basic economic security they require.
BOOKS FOR FURTHER READING avaiulablr from all Heritage Book Services and Veritas Publishing Co., W.A.
Money Bomb," by James Gibbs Stewart.
"The Money Trick" by The Institute of Economic Democracy. AUS$13.00 posted
Credit -Aspects" by Anthony Cooney Price: AUS $11.50 posted.
"Social Credit: Obelisks"
by Anthony Cooney Price: AUS $11.50 posted.
Enemy Within the Empire" by Eric D. Butler $8.00 posted
Saga of a Peoples' Bank" by Peter Lock $3.00 posted
THE MYSTERIES OF MAMMON (MONEY)
"New Times Survey" is published by the Australian League of Rights, Box 1052. G.P.O. Melbourne 3001.