This fits very well with what I learned  from Mullins, who picked it up from
Pound.


----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 8:29 AM
Subject: RE: [SOCIAL CREDIT] Anti-Semitism


> This was Finlay's take on the matter:
>
> "But the nature of this anti-Jewish outlook must be probed, for it is
doubtful whether it can be called anti-Semitism in the normal sense."
> --
>
> John L. Finlay, *Social Credit: The English Origins,*
> 1972, pages 102-105.
>
> (notes omitted)
> ...What made Douglas fear organization and what made
> him insist upon the organic was his bold analysis of
> human nature and especially of human motivation.
> While holding that most people were good, socially
> minded creatures, he allowed the existence of a
> minority whose driving force was the pursuit of
> power. It was here in the identification of the power
> complex that Douglas showed his originality.  In a
> pretotalitarian age it was difficult to conceive of
> anyone's being motivated by power for its own sake.
> Yet it was this point which Douglas had stressed from
> his earliest writings onwards, the second of his
> articles in the *English Review" was entitled "The
> Pyramid of Power."  In that article he described the
> "will to power" and noted that it was particularly
> virulent in Germany. The war had encouraged the
> development of this will, and not only in Germany, so
> that a new danger faced the world. It was not merely
> an intensification of previous conflict, for there
> was a qualitative difference too. "Strong and
> embittered differences of opinion resulting in some
> sort of conflict are nothing new in the history of
> civilization," Douglas noted, "they recur with dreary
> monotony ...But there is definitely novel component
> in the present upheaval ...the cleavage is in the
> main horizontal and the issue is impersonal." In
> Douglas's view, then, groups were of two kinds. There
> were traditional natural groupings which predated the
> emergence of the "novel component in the present
> upheaval" and which were to be preserved as essential
> protection against the coming storm. They would tend
> to be small, and in fact Douglas once declared that
> no organization should exceed three thousand. On the
> other hand there were artificial organizations which
> had no real purpose but to provide the means by which
> the power seekers could arrange the people into a
> perfect hierarchy of obedience. It was for this
> reason that Douglas was so distrustful of democracy.
> Not that he was prepared to give up the concept
> itself. He declared his belief in the "Democracy of
> the Common Will"; what he rejected was the "Democracy
> either of the Intellect or of the emotions, which
> lead directly to dictatorships." Thus he refused to
> distinguish between the extreme right and the extreme
> left. He sensed rather than understood that mass
> mobilization through the ballot box would lead to "a
> Mussolini and a Lenin or Trotsky who are identical in
> their contempt for Liberty and passion for the rule
> of centralizing force." The same intuition led him to
> oppose the Work Study philosophy and its later
> manifestation, Technocracy, two movements which
> maintained that a planned approach to the routine of
> work at all levels could lead to tremendous increases
> in output. Such methods demanded a high level of
> organization and therefore were to be feared. A
> typical Douglas judgment upon these movements was
> that they were "Syndicalist in essence and [did] not
> differ very widely...from ... Fascism."
>
> It was inevitable that sooner or later Douglas should
> seek to identify more precisely the power-seeking
> conspiracy. In the beginning he was restrained in his
> attitude towards it. But from an early belief that it
> might, "Like Topsy, just have growed," he moved to
> attack "a very deeply laid and well considered plot
> of enslaving the industrial world to the German-
> American-Jewish financiers." It was not long before
> the German-American element faded into the
> background, leaving the Jews as the real villains of
> the piece ...But the nature of this anti-Jewish
> outlook must be probed, for it is doubtful whether it
> can be called anti-Semitism in the normal sense.
>
> In the early days Douglas always denied any animus
> against individual Jews. Even in the 1930s he wrote:
> "It must be emphasized that attacks upon the Jews as
> a body are wholly indefensible, except in cases where
> Jews act as a body while utilizing advantages which
> proceed from their incorporation as individuals in
> other nations. So far as this review is concerned,
> only their financial relationships are in question."
> On a latter occasion her asserted, "The very last
> thing which I should desire ...would be the
> association of the Social Credit movement with Jew-
> baiting," and he acknowledged that the persecution of
> Jews would mean "an irreparable loss to the rest of
> the world." He could praise individual Jews and
> thought highly of Sidney Hillman, the Jewish leader
> of the American Clothing Workers, whom he met in
> America and whom he described as "one of the ablest
> labour leaders I have ever met." But later a harder
> line began to emerge. Conveniently, Douglas
> summarized his attitude towards the Jewish question
> as follows:  "If I have, for my own part, come to
> believe that there is a fundamental relationship
> between the troubles which afflict Europe and what is
> known as the Jewish problem I have formed that
> opinion with reluctance ...perhaps the first
> necessity is to explain beyond any risk of
> misunderstanding, the nature of the charge, and why
> it is a racial and not a personal indictment.  In
> this connection, Disraeli's description of his people
> as "a splendidly organized race' is significant.
> Organization has much of the tragedy of life to its
> debt; and organization is a Jewish speciality."  The
> most important point about the Jews was the extent of
> their exclusiveness. This meant a great amount of
> inbreeding and there was, too, a reliance upon a
> narrow tradition, especially upon an education which
> stressed a detailed knowledge of a restricted number
> of sacred books. The result of this way of life,
> thought Douglas, was the breeding of a race which was
> far more homogenous than any other , a race which
> tended to think in the same overall way. Because of
> this it was the ideal vehicle for those seeking
> power; it provided a ready disciplined army which
> could be manipulated into doing the will of the real
> rulers. In fact, to Douglas, the Jews were the
> unwilling and unknowing dupes of a conspiracy, the
> conspiracy itself; some, but not all, of the leaders
> of this conspiracy would be Jewish. This aspect of
> the argument was brought out clearly in the case of
> the Freemasons, who were likewise a tool of a
> conspiracy. "It must be remembered that the essence
> of Freemasonry is that 99% of Freemasons don't know
> what it is about, or what they are doing."
>
> Evidently to Douglas, Jewishness was not a racial
> term at all, but a philosophical description. This
> point was made very clearly when he once divided
> systems into two, the characteristics of the first
> being "Deductive, Totalitarian, Machiavellian,
> Idealistic, Jewish, Love of Power, Planned Economy,"
> and of the second and balancing group, "inductive,
> Democratic, Baconian, Realistic, Christian, Love of
> Freedom, Organic Growth." Anti-Semitism of the
> Douglas kind, if it can be called anti-Semitism at
> all, may be fantastic, may be dangerous even, in that
> it may be twisted into a dreadful form, but it is not
> itself vicious nor evil. It is merely an extreme form
> of religio-philosophic propaganda, to be classed with
> Coulton's anti-Catholic tirades. And finally it must
> not be forgotten that Douglas did not seek to
> discriminate against Jews as people; it was never
> suggested that the National Dividend be withheld from
> them.
> --
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
> http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005
>
>

--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------


Reply via email to