***>you seem instead to have turned it into an attack
on Zarlenga for not singing hymns of praise to your
personal super-hero. <***

Not "hymns of praise" of my "personal super-hero."
The book pretends to be a work of scholarship.  It
isn't for reasons I have stated.  Wasn't it you who
said he extensively discusses Pound and Mullins?  It
isn't possible to discuss Pound and Mullins without
bringing Douglas into the discussion unless you are
trying to hide something.  I have a theory as to why
they are hiding it.  It goes back many years to when
the Georgists were in conflict with social credit.
Now, Zarlenga is trying to demonstrate that Henry
George was a greenbacker.  He wasn't.  His movement
in the 19th century was in conflict with the
greenbackers.  So there is some rewriting of history
going on here.

***>The book does not mention Social Credit or
Douglas, and the author (with whom I have
corresponded extensively) does not seem to be aware
of the connection between the research he has
assembled here and the ideas of Douglas. <***

I think he has to be aware and is lying when he says
he isn't aware.

***>All I know is that Alexander Del Mar features
prominently as a source in The Lost Science, and that
his work was done and published mainly before Douglas
started to write. <***

Yes, Del Mar was prominent in the greenbacker
movement and spent a lot of time in England.  Del
Mar's work was mostly historical not theoretical.
Arthur Kitson had more direct influence on Douglas
than Del Mar.  Douglas was certainly in the
greebacker-populist tradition.  One of his books was
dedicated to Kitson.

***>I was just tweaking you, in recollection of your
belief that Kelso and Adler stole their idea about
the cultural inheritance (capital) from Douglas. <***

I can't say about Adler.  I am quite confident that
Kelso was a thief.  By that I mean the claims to
originality.  He was a pompous little fellow with
delusions of grandeur.  Douglas made no such claims.
Indeed, he tried to demonstrate in every instance
that leading authorities in the literature confirmed
his thought.  Even where he was original he demurred
taking credit for it.

***>it seems to me that it is pretty difficult to
take the trench without an army. <***

There was then an army and the army did have some
success in New Zealand, as it did in Alberta.  It may
even have had some success in regard to the national
regime in Canada, if what COMER says is true about
Canadian Central Bank policy during and after WWII.
That is an aspect of the matter I'm trying to
clarify, as per the question I posed to you a couple
of weeks ago.  It may even have had some influence in
the USA, if the WWII Fed policy of purchasing
Treasury securities directly from Treasury at near
zero coupon rates can be taken to be an indication.
That was a big though largely untold factor in our
victory and subsequent post-war prosperity.

_________________________________________________________________
Fast, faster, fastest: Upgrade to Cable or DSL today! https://broadband.msn.com


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