LAST MONTH we featured a guest article – Daylight Robbery! – by Darwin Grey, a young supporter of monetary reform. He examined the current banking system (where the banks can create money out of thin-air and demands it, and more, in return) and concluded that it was one of “debt-slavery.”
But simply rejecting such a system is not enough. What should it be replaced by?
Darwin rejected the two main economic theories (Keynesian and Monetarist) and looked for what might be termed an economic ‘Third Way’ – an idea that went way beyond these two. He found it in Social Credit, a radical and progressive economic theory first proposed by Major Clifford Hugh Douglas. To read Darwin’s original article on debt-slavery, click here: http://nationalliberal.org/daylight-robbery
This is the second of Darwin’s article’s looking at various aspects of Social Credit. Heritage: The Fourth Factor of Production looks at the moral justification for a national dividend as well as pointing out more flaws in Classical as well as Marxist economics.
–
Even Batman knows that the banks are on the fiddle!
ACCORDING to orthodox economics, there are three factors of production; land, labour and capital.
What this position mistakes for an increase in the quality of labour, however, is really a fourth factor; heritage.
Allow me to elaborate:
The average physicist now knows far more about his field than Albert Einstein ever did, the average GP now knows far more about anatomy than Henry Gray ever did and the average General now knows far more about war than Sun Tzu ever did.
In each of those cases, would it be fair to say that the former is smarter than the latter?
No, of course it wouldn’t. The difference is that the latter has left the former with an inheritance of knowledge. We, as a society, have access to the work of all the past generations.
This can summed up in this simple truism: You don’t re-invent the wheel!
Now, knowing that we owe a great deal of our productive ability to our shared societal heritage, is it fair that only a few men benefit?
It isn’t and C.H. Douglas, in his Social Credit Theory, has shown us the means to rectify this.
He showed that we produce far more than we can afford to consume. We are, as a society, in credit. This ‘Social Credit’, the difference between the total amount of money in the economy and the total value of goods can be printed, interest-free, and issued to every citizen as his inherited right.
That old communist mantra, “he who does not work shall not eat” (a stance that capitalists, too, are – ironically – sympathetic with), presumes that each generation is born with a blank state and must, essentially, build up everything that their forefathers already have.
The truth is that we have all inherited a productive capability that could be used for the construction of a paradise state; people would be freer for lives of leisure and self-development. We would leave our children with a much greater opportunity for leisure and they would, similarly, leave their children with such.
The only thing keeping us from achieving popular consumer sovereignty over the economy is the financial sector’s criminal control of the money supply.
This might all seem too good to be true but we shouldn’t let that deter us. The fight for Social Credit, one that many Englishmen tried to fight a generation or so ago, will be very difficult.
The Democrats for Social Credit, a New Zealand political party, can attest to that fact; they face constant ridicule, on the one hand, and a media blackout on the other.
The financial sector is petrified of Social Credit. Communism and Fascism, its other two enemies, are, at their core, extremist ideologies and only see popular support in times of crisis (they do not frighten the banker so much).
Social Credit, on the other hand, demands only a very reasonable thing from government; that everyone should be just a little better off and that the, universally despised, creditor class (the big banks and international finance elite) should be locked up and banned from ever causing trouble again.
