***>my interpretation of one-half of his thesis<***

***>He will find out there from whom Douglas stole
his ideas. <***

Keith, it would be helpful it you will provide us a
summary of both halves of Zarlenga's thesis as you
see them.  I don't have the slightest idea what
either half is at this point.  All I do know is that
Zarlenga writes from the tunnel vision perspective of
a very biased but well funded group of people.  The
book isn't available in local libraries.  Amazon
lists it for $60, which is quite expensive.  There
might not be anyone on this list but you who has it.
It would be helpful if you will tell us specifically
from whom Zarlenga (or you) infer that Douglas
(without acknowledging Douglas' existence in the case
of Zarlenga) "stole" his ideas.  I've already said
that A+B was inspired by Marx's thesis of the falling
rate of profit.  Douglas was inspired by a great many
people.  He was very well read.  Douglas himself
acknowledged that "someone" discovered A+B in
rudimentary form early in the 19th century.  My guess
is that person would have been Malthus.  You might
recall that I earlier sent you documentary support
for that hypothesis.  Douglas however was being
modest.  A+B in the form that Douglas presented it is
the work of inspired genius.
--

***>But how about some help interpreting the next
one, which has obviously been distorted in
transcription? <***

"I hope you see what I mean by that individuals into
classes and to say for instance that this is a
movement of the down and outs, or something of that
sort, is a victory for the financial system. It is
not a case of that kind at all. The whole world is
threatened with overwhelming disaster within a very
measurable period of time..."

We're all in the same boat with the financiers.  The
class struggle is a diversion.
--

***>Same question re this next paragraph<***

"So that if the matter is properly investigated,
there is every sound justification for going to
anyone may be one enemy, and that is not each other,
but it is the financial system."

Continuation of the same theme:  The class struggle
is a diversion.  It is a victory for the "financial
system" if this is turned into a fight between groups
of people or systems of organization rather than
between philosophies.
--

***>OK, here we have it from Douglas that the first
trench is to spread understanding<***

No, spreading understanding is something else.  He is
saying those with understanding must take action.
You can't win the war without taking the first
trench.  Talking in and of itself accomplishes
nothing.  In that 1934 address he gives examples of
regulatory action that could begin to achieve that
objective.  In the context of 1934 there was
considerable professed sympathy for social credit in
New Zealand's political and legislative circles, as
there was contemporaneously in Alberta and elsewhere.
Professing sympathy is one thing.  Actually taking
action is another.  He was urging action at was then
a critical moment in world history.
--

_________________________________________________________________
Try MSN Messenger 6.0 with integrated webcam functionality! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_webcam


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