Almost any reference to Pound includes his early
association to Douglas and social credit.  If you
don't believe me, go to the library and look up
anything on Pound, anything at all.  Go online to
Britannica.com .  It's there in the biographical
article on Pound.  Zarlenga can write--what is it?--a
thousand page book that discusses Pound's and
Mullins' monetary theories extensively as you report
without mentioning Douglas or social credit, and
tells you he doesn't see the connection between Pound
and Douglas and Quigley, for God's sake.  He feigns
ignorance.  It's crap put out as scholarship.  It's
written from an extremely biased viewpoint if this
can be taken as representing at all tenor of the book
in total.  What is less well known is that Douglas
purged Pound and his fascists from social credit in
1924.  The Georgists knew it.  The Nazis knew it.  I
haven't seen the book I will admit.  All I know about
it is from your snippets and Geoffrey Gardiner's
review on Gang8, which wasn't favorable at all.  I do
intend to look at it when I can afford to purchase a
copy--it's not cheap.  I'm sure there's useful
information in it.

I do think there are conspiracies in this world, some
of them most conscious.  The Georgist movement has
been one of the enemies of social credit from the
beginning.  That I know for a fact.  They have tens
if not hundreds of millions in endowments to fund
crap like Zarlenga's and the junk from Hudson--and
some of it is really junk.  With that kind of money
they can dictate what goes in and what is omitted
from the supposed scholarship they finance.

It was indeed mandated by someone that Douglas' name
was never to be mentioned, I am now quite convinced.
In the beginning I wasn't.  When I first read where
Douglas said it I took it as evidence of his
paranoia.  That mandate is apparently still in effect
in some quarters.  His name must always be preceded
with the appellation "anti-semite," if speaking his
name cannot be avoided, like the recent Edmonton
hatchet job that Wally forwarded to us a few days
ago.  That article, authored by a "scholar" with
impressive credentials, contains what I think is a
completely fabricated quotation from Douglas--source
unknown--which if it were to be believed that it
really came from Douglas, would seem to be proof
positive that he was indeed a flaming, irrational
nutcase.



From: Keith Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SOCIAL CREDIT] Zarlenga
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:16:45 -0700

>>>>>>> He's not that stupid.<<<<<<<<<<

Neither am I, as a matter of fact.  But just what point are you making, and
what is its importance?

_________________________________________________________________
Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage. http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es


--^----------------------------------------------------------------
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