Social Credit News

Friday, 21 November 2014 11:33

El Crédito Social - Hispanismo.org

Written by M. Oliver Heydorn
Rate this item
(0 votes)

Quite recently, Martin Ant has translated a number of blog entries from this website into Spanish and has made them available on Hispanismo.org. Most of these can be found at the following address: http://hispanismo.org/economia/20169-articulos-del-clifford-hugh-douglas-institute-oliver-heydorn-w-klinck-etc.html. He has also translated a large amount of material from Douglas and from other Social Credit authors that can be found in various places in the site's economic forum: http://hispanismo.org/economia/.

 

I would like very much to thank Martin for his stupendous efforts! The importance of Social Credit for Spain and for Europe in general, both in terms of their long-term survival as distinct cultural entities and in consideration of the present financial and economic crises, cannot be underestimated. As I explained in a speech that I recently delivered on the occasion of the New Times Dinner in Australia: “The Social Credit ideas of Major Douglas are still, after so many decades, the single most important set of ideas if we are to salvage civilization and especially western or European civilization ... There isn’t a single social problem, not a single symptom of societal decline, that is not in some way connected with what Douglas discovered ..."

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

2 comments

  • Comment Link  Dias Divina de Morais Saturday, 10 February 2018 11:39 posted by Dias Divina de Morais

    Boa noite, achei que interessante. Preciso mais esclarecimentos sobre este assunto.

  • Comment Link Martin Ant Saturday, 10 February 2018 11:39 posted by Martin Ant

    Hi, Dr. Heydorn.

    I´m pleased to spread this important doctrine. I like philosophy and I have always been inquiring about the root causes of the things (because this is the proper function for anyone who really wants to philosophize: understanding all the things by its ultimate causes).

    I know that we can´t actually encompass the complete understanding of all the things (this is the error of modern and contemporary rationalism-hegelianism, which try to “elevate” people to an angel-type comprehension –even to a divine-type comprehension– which produce, as a result, an animalization of the people), but on the contrary we can know the fundamental things thanks to the Divine Revelation (which we have received from the Tradition of the true Church of the true Religion, of course), and we can approximate ourselves in our understanding of the natural things of this world (natural or physical, and human or social things) intimately connected with the fundamental things of the Other World.

    So, this inquiry about the fundamental problems (i.e., root or ultimate causes) of our contemporary age (the age of the Revolution, with capital “R”) has been the principal task of the best philosophers of the last century: Rafael Gambra, Gustave Thibon, Marcel de Corte, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Josef Pieper, etc…, who we can know them as “philosophers of the customs”. All of them detected the essential problem of modern “civilization” in the progressive destruction of the social life inherited from the Christendom civilization, i.e., the progressive destruction of the natural base or substrate upon which can only flourish a true natural and supernatural life. This is the masterstroke of the revolutionaries (and their preternatural masters): the destruction of the foundations of normal physical life overcompensating it with an overflow of the singular reason alone, and which results in a pure rationalized materialism.

    Once this divorce between life and spirit is achieved in a personal level, then it is pursued in a social level, making the revolutionaries a “social” world at image and likeness to such personal divorce, i.e., they arrange a totalitarian State in order to overcompensate the progressive destruction of the organic and autonomous social life.

    This is a process in which the statism, on one hand, and the disocialization, on the other hand, feed back themselves, and they behaviour both as cause and effect the one with the other.

    A spanish social catholic, Salvador Minguijón, said: “The stability of existences creates the hold, which engender sweet sentiments and sound customs. These crystallize in wholesome institutions, which, in turn, conservate and fasten the good customs. This is the essence of Tradition”. So, as well as we see that the union of life and spirit create a sound base for natural life and, which is most important, for supernatural life (which in turn reinforce the authentic natural life, because “the grace not destroy nature but perfect it”), the same feed back take place –although in a bad way- between statism and disocialization.

    All this constitute the cause of the coming of all this “moralist” ideologies (jansenism, puritanism, etc…) which emerge as purely rationalized morals; a moral without any incarnation in habits and customs of the people; and which finally results in the opposite (the hegelian contraries which destroy themselves) ideology: a equally rationalized materialism.

    The “philosophers of the customs” above mentioned truly detected the problem, but they detected it in a symptomatic level, not in a diagnostic level. We had to await to the coming of C. H. Douglas in order to complete the puzzle. The philosophers of customs failed to make an investigation on the financial system, which would have given them the fundamental clue of all of their correct (but incomplete) social analysis. It is in this incursion in the running of the present financial system where we will can find the root cause (i.e., the cause which constitutes the proper investigation of anyone who really wants to philosophize) of the bad social symptoms correctly denounced by those philosophers of customs. In other words, the financial system conditions (if not determines) the personal and, consequently, the social framework; social framework, then, artificially arranged, and which is reinforced with the correlative ideologies (puritanism, jansenism, communism, social darwinism, …) which emerge as “scientifically” justified by a “sociology of behaviours” or a merely recollection of “facts” (the “natural” or logic facts of a framework arbitrarily arranged previously with the no less arbitrarily manipulation of the financial system).

    In this way, people with good faith, tend to confuse merely secondary or proximate causes (which only have the virtue to aggraviate a problem already existing) with the primary or ultimate cause, i.e., the real cause (which is the one that truly create, ultimately, the whole problem). Parallel, the same people tend to confuse a merely palliative or “patch” pseudosolution with the real and true solution of the problem. This is the reason that people discuss about infinite social little things (and correlative the State grows its interventionism or “reformism” in every detail of people´s life with its palliative remedies) trying to solve the so-called “social problem”… and all of them forget that the only one thing that is necessary to be “touched” is the financial system (and then all the social ills will progressively cure themselves into the bargain, because the financial reform will contribute to the social stabilization of people, sine qua non requirement for an ulterior restoration of social life, which is the environment or atmosphere in which a human person can receive fruitfully the grace for a supernatural life, in the same way that a good land can receive the seed, and a stony ground cannot without difficulty).

    We must thanks to C. H. Douglas to have shed light on the root cause of social ill, and put the foundations for its reconstruction.

    (P.D. Sorry for my english)

Latest Articles

  • Living Beyond Your Means
    We are often told that people should not ‘live beyond their means’, that is, that no individual person, nor any corporate entity like a business or a government, should spend more money during a given period than they take in as income or as revenue. Doing so is judged to be profligate, irresponsible, and only setting oneself up for pain in the long run. For countless centuries, if not millennia, the balanced ‘budget’ has been regarded as the sine qua non of fiscal prudence and ‘sound’ finance. And yet, if we look at our economies over any given period of time, it is quite normal for individual consumers, considered in the aggregate, to spend more than they receive in income, for governments at all levels to spend more than they take in viataxes, and even for businesses, considered again as a whole, to spend more money (thanks to long-term capital…
    Written on Monday, 15 July 2019 13:21 Read more...
  • Why Overt Monetary Financing of a UBI Need Not Result in Demand Inflation
    When one explains to the common person the proposal of a National Dividend as a state created and distributed monetary gift given to all as a credit for the nation’s total production, there is one very common objection or concern that people often raise. They think that there is a danger that this will result in inflation or a devaluing of the nation’s currency, a devaluation that may even been as bad as the hyperinflation that has recently taken place in Zimbabwe or Venezuela as a result of severe political corruption, incompetence, or foreign interference. But before one can understand why a 'debt-free' 'basic income' is not inflationary, or need not be inflationary, one must first understand something of the economic and monetary theory upon which this suggestion is based, namely Douglas Social Credit.
    Written on Monday, 08 July 2019 14:09 Read more...
  • Financing a Basic Income Through the Money Creation Powers of the Bank of Canada
    "The money creation process employed by the Bank of Canada is quite simple and mirrors the money creation process which, through the private banking system, is responsible for the greater majority of our money supply.[1]Contrary to what many people assume, banks are not borrowers and lenders of pre-existing money, but are rather creators and destroyers of the money that they issue in the form of bank credit. The same holds true for the Central Bank. Whenever an auction of new government securities is held, the Bank of Canada buys a certain percentage of these securities by creating digital accounting entries in the Federal Government’s deposit account with the bank. This deposit is recorded as a liability of the bank, while the newly purchased security is recorded as an asset on the Bank of Canada’s balance sheet."
    Written on Sunday, 07 July 2019 18:28 Read more...