WHO'S FOR LOCAL CURRENCIES?

by Betty Luks
Those who have been following the discussions on ways and means of implementing a local currency in their communities, and/or region, will be interested in the following exciting report from the Michael journal of the Pilgrims of St. Michael, Rougemont, Quebec, Canada, July 2004. The story is about a visit to Madagascar by full-time Pilgrim Marcel Lefebvre and a Swiss companion as guests of the Catholic Episcopal Commission on Justice and Peace:

"Then we went into the bush, driven by the secretary, in the pastor's "4 x 4" vehicle. We were invited by the Secretary General of the Justice and Peace Commission, Mr. Jean Marie, a father of 8 children, who is involved with church activities. He managed to gather all the people of the village to meet us. We began with the recitation of the Rosary, and then gave a talk on the cause of their poverty, and the way out, by establishing a local money system, like in Switzerland and in Argentine, where they call it 'social credits'.
We told them about the possibility of creating their own figures (money, accounting system…ed) to develop their area, without waiting for the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and all the other money-lenders who exploit them. We founded together the first Social Credit bank, just as the five islanders did in "The Money Myth Exploded". They brought all their belongings to create a fund to start the new bank. It was really moving and impressive to see them bring all they had. They are really good people. Bishop Raymond told us that within a year, there will be 500 small banks like this one in Madagascar.
So where we founded this first bank, we gave a Rosary to every family that enlisted, and made them promise to say the family Rosary every day for the success of this important undertaking. Before founding the bank, Mr. de Siebenthal asked the priest who was accompanying us to confess the Faithful. There will be no interest charged in this bank; on the contrary, dividends will soon be given to every participant. They will develop their area in an impressive manner."
We will continue to report on this development as news comes to hand.

Comment
There really was no need for the villagers to bring "all their belongings to create a fund to start the new bank" as they are creating their own 'credit'; they will be drawing on their own 'social credit'. It could be that at this stage they simply cannot grasp the real truth of 'credit' and it will take them time to 'digest' the truth … in which case it was easier for them to do this…for now.
For further understanding: "The Money Myth Exploded"; "In This Age of Plenty" by Louis Even". Available from all League Book Services.

THE WARLORDS OF WASHINGTON

In a recent article "The Warlords of Washington", John Pilger argues the case for George Bush winning the coming presidential election, seeing him and his party as the 'lesser evil of the two'. He assessed the situation - up to a point:

"Most of the US's recent wars were launched by Democratic presidents. Why expect better of Kerry? The debate between US liberals and conservatives is a fake; Bush may be the lesser evil. On 6 May last, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution which, in effect, authorised a "pre-emptive" attack on Iran. The vote was 376-3. Undeterred by the accelerating disaster in Iraq, Republicans and Democrats, wrote one commentator, "once again joined hands to assert the responsibilities of American power".

The joining of hands across America's illusory political divide has a long history…Wading through the blood, a new breed of popular historian, the journalist in the pay of rich newspaper owners, spun the heroic myths of a supersect called Americanism, which advertising and public relations in the 20th century formalised as an ideology, embracing both conservatism and liberalism. In the modern era, most of America's wars have been launched by liberal Democratic presidents - Harry Truman in Korea, John F Kennedy and Lyndon B Johnson in Vietnam, Jimmy Carter in Afghanistan.

The fictitious "missile gap" was invented by Kennedy's liberal New Frontiersmen as a rationale for keeping the cold war going. In 1964, a Democrat-dominated Congress gave President Johnson authority to attack Vietnam, a defenceless peasant nation offering no threat to the United States…During the past 60 years, only once has Congress voted to limit the president's "right" to terrorise other countries. This aberration, the Clark Amendment 1975, a product of the great anti-Vietnam war movement, was repealed in 1985 by Ronald Reagan.
During Reagan's assaults on central America in the 1980s, liberal voices such as Tom Wicker of the New York Times, doyen of the "doves", seriously debated whether or not tiny, impoverished Nicaragua was a threat to the United States.

Pushing lesser 'evilism'
These days, terrorism having replaced the red menace, another fake debate is under way. This is lesser evilism. Although few liberal-minded voters seem to have illusions about John Kerry, their need to get rid of the "rogue" Bush administration is all-consuming. Representing them in Britain, the Guardian says that the coming presidential election is "exceptional". "Mr Kerry's flaws and limitations are evident," says the paper, "but they are put in the shade by the neoconservative agenda and catastrophic war-making of Mr Bush. This is an election in which almost the whole world will breathe a sigh of relief if the incumbent is defeated."

The whole world may well breathe a sigh of relief: the Bush regime is both dangerous and universally loathed; but that is not the point. We have debated lesser evilism so often on both sides of the Atlantic that it is surely time to stop gesturing at the obvious and to examine critically a system that produces the Bushes and their Democratic shadows. For those of us who marvel at our luck in reaching mature years without having been blown to bits by the warlords of Americanism, Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal, and for the millions all over the world who now reject the American contagion in political life, the true issue is clear.
It is the continuation of a project that began more than 500 years ago. The privileges of "discovery and conquest" granted to Christopher Columbus in 1492, in a world the pope considered "his property to be disposed according to his will", have been replaced by another piracy transformed into the divine will of Americanism and sustained by technological progress, notably that of the media." (emphasis added…ed)

'AMERICANISM' - JUST ANOTHER WORD FOR 'MAMMON'

The "continuation of a project" which John Pilger identifies today as "Americanism" has a much longer history than that of the last 500 years. That which Pilger describes as a 'project' Clifford Hugh Douglas described as the policy of a philosophy. It is a body of beliefs carried down through the centuries by a group of people… and applied when the power has been gained and the timing is right. Its goal? World power and control.

This philosophy of the will-to-power, i.e., this body of beliefs, was clearly identified by Jesus Christ 2000 years ago - Mammon. In his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, William Barclay gave some interesting history of the word 'Mammon':
"The word mamon had a most curious and a most revealing history. It comes from a root which means to entrust; and mamon was that which a man entrusted to a banker for safe deposit of some kind. Mamon was the wealth which a man entrusted to someone to keep safe for him. But as the years went on mamon came to mean, not that which is entrusted but that in which a man puts his trust. The end of the process was that mamon came to be spelled with a capital M and came to be regarded as nothing less than a god."

Nations are 'Instruments' of a Policy
What John Pilger has not recognised is that Nations or States are but instruments of this policy of a philosophy - and have been for thousands of years! America was chosen as its instrument after the British Empire had served its purpose and the centre of power was transferred from London to Wall Street. Nations or States are chosen and retained for shorter or longer historical periods and discarded when a better instrument becomes available. It is a parasitic system that cannot live apart from a host body.
We now know America is being brought to its financial and economic knees, but can only guess which nation is next on the list. Possibly modern China? History is 'policy - crystallised' History, in which men of understanding as well as of action have erected signposts for the use of their successors.

He who writes history, chooses history
There are also sign posts for those who share the philosophy of the will to freedom - if they have eyes to see. John Pilger wrote of "a (1492) world (which) the pope considered "his property to be disposed (of) according to his will". Sadly, because papalism didn't remain satisfied with spiritual leadership, and failed to distinguish between Authority and Power, the power to dominate was taken far into the temporal sphere. This direction, pursued over generations, built up the stresses and pressures which prefaced the 'Reformation'; an explosion in which papal absolutism was broken into fragments.
Mr. Pilger needed to consider the sign posts challenging the centralising of power in Christian and British history!

Hewlett Edwards wrote in "The Cultivation of History"
"Consider then these signposts of the past: the Gospels, the Athanasian Creed and Magna Carta. Although so widely different in content and expression each is a crystallisation of the same policy, which has become history. It is this history we must cultivate:
· Christian charity (caritas) in which to live and grow
· Athanasian (Greek) penetration of reality as the guide to growth
· and British determination to secure results.
These also are one in our Constitution but that Constitution has been crippled and made impotent. For its restoration, another crystallisation of policy is needed…

We must have freedom to choose or refuse
It is necessary to provide individuals, as individuals, not collectively, with much more opportunity to judge political matters by results, and to be able to reject, individually and not collectively, policies they do not like… To crystallise these directives into history is to bring substance to things hoped for and to provide evidence of things to come: it is the establishment of the threefold Constitution as a production unit of Truth and Freedom..."

Magna Carta, King John and Runnymede
King John failed in this. He did not distinguish but tried to combine Authority, Power and Law in his own person; and, in this violation of well-understood but largely unformulated principles, he brought the constitutional issue to a head.

The Interlocking Activities of Church (Authority), King (Power) and People (Law)
The Barons at Runnymede may not have realised fully the part they played: but they played it. They stood as an embodiment of the people of England, all England; the outcome and incarnation of the inter-locking activities of Church, King, and People; and their purpose was to bring the King to recognise his limitations in this threefold structure by the implementation of the rights of the other parties."

All the signs are again warning us
As this newsletter is being prepared the horrible drama in southern Russia of the approximately 1500 men, women and children being used as hostages in return for political demands is being played out to its tragic end. Yet another sign post of the building up of such stress that a people would rather die fighting, or blow themselves up, than live under the yoke of a centralised tyranny. But sadly, using innocent victims for their own ends is surely not the way to go.

A FURTHER 'CRYSTALISATION OF POLICY'
Another of Australia's icons has announced it can't survive under the present financial and economic policies of consecutive governments and is heading offshore. The Ballarat Courier reported: "Clothing retailer Fletcher Jones will end its Australian manufacturing within two months, at a cost of 600 jobs in Victoria and South Australia." And predictably the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union yesterday criticised the company's announcement that it would close its Warnambool and Mount Gambier plants, saying Fletcher Jones did not do enough to save its Australian operations. Unions will never look at the causes but keep harping on the effects.

Ballarat letter writer Ron Fischer summed up the core problem
"The barriers to trade that the free trade agreement is addressing are a direct result of the malaise of economics. Since the Industrial Revolution when machines began replacing human input no nation has been able to distribute internally everything it produced because machines have a cost but they do not consume their own output. One nation's exports are another's imports. Thus the scramble for export "markets" has intensified. Restrictions on imports of many sorts were devised, along with stimulants to exports. Anyone who expects this "free trade" agreement to be of any use without tackling the fundamentals is deluded."

A NEW AND DYNAMIC WAY
C.H. Douglas presented the evidence to an unbelieving world as long ago as 1918. Douglas said mankind was at the end of an age of scarcity and was on the verge of an age of plenty, and in order to accommodate the new situation, there had to be a totally new way of looking at how man was to gain access to this abundance of production. In many cases, no longer would man have to work by the sweat of his brow, machines would do the work for him.

A problem of distribution not scarcity
He saw the problem could be traced back to the method of distribution and put forward suggestions for using the method then used - the money system - in a new way, a new manner. He insisted the social principles behind the Capitalistic monetary mechanism, and the economic system which has developed from those social principles are impelled by the policy of concentrated power for the few, and of restriction, subservience and fear for the many. Such principles are pre-Christian and are antagonistic to Christian thought and also oppose the facts of modern-day material development.

SOCIAL CREDIT AND CHRISTIAN THOUGHT
There has been much internet discussion flowing back and forth across a number of countries on the Christian concepts inherent within the suggestions put forward by Douglas and we offer the following contribution by veteran social crediter Anthony Cooney of the U.K. for readers to contemplate on. The discussions are taking place between Christians from a wide range of denominations who are willing to be open and honest in their approach to one another.

Bearing in mind the definition of Social Credit is
"The power of human beings, in association, to produce the results intended - measured in terms of their satisfaction."

Anthony Cooney wrote on the subject of 'faith' and 'works' in relation to the social credit of a community
"It would be a mistake to start a civil war over the theology of faith and works. There is the problem of loss of meaning in all translations which makes it necessary to carefully define terms which may be used in different ways. Hopefully to settle a dispute, which would otherwise run into volumes, here are some definitions and distinctions which might satisfy.

WORKS:
"The works of the Law" - ritual purification, prayer, penances, food and washing, etc., etc.
WORKS:
"Good Works" :- better named "Works of Charity," or "Works of Mercy."
Which of these does Paul mean when he castigates "Works"?
Christ, in describing the Judgement is very specific about "Works of Mercy" and the fate of those who do them not. He does not mention "Faith."
FAITH: "Fiducia," Trust in Christ to Justify one by his Atonement.
Compare in temporal affairs with "The Fiduciary issue".
(Fiduciary: a person who holds assets in trust for a beneficiary…ed)
FAITH: "Credo" - "The evidence of things not seen" - Belief in the Truth which God has revealed.
"Credo" without "Fiducia" is "Dead faith". The Fiduciary Issue without Good Works is inflation.
The "B" element in prices is Dead Work. (Refer to Introduction to Social Credit series…ed)
Social Credit is the revelation, of truth in the temporal field, which we accept with confidence.
JUSTIFICATION: Not "earned" but by Grace - compare with "Unearned Increments of Association."
SANCTIFICATION: Granted as Grace by Good Works. Luther and Calvin, it seems to me, failed to distinguish between Justification and Sanctification. Protestantism, consequently, fails to distinguish between "Works of the Law," and "Good Works."

In the Epistle to the Galatians, Paul is warning against the false teaching that the "Works of the Law" justify a man. He is not saying that "Good Works" do not Sanctify a man's moral character. He is saying that the works of the Law do not justify a man by a sort of celestial book-keeping.
He is condemning the false doctrine of Justification by "works" (ritual) which has taken root among the Galatians.
It would be ridiculous to assert that the men of the Catholic Middle Ages had no "work ethic." The hardest work, stone-masonry, appears to have attracted many practitioners, just take a look at the cathedrals and castles which they built.
But as Douglas points out ("The Tragedy of Human Effort,") they only worked every other day. Alternate days were Feast Days when men rested from servile work.
There is a vast difference between standing at a conveyor belt making things which are neither needed nor wanted, and building your own hydro-electric plan (as Douglas did) decorating your home, delving your garden, or carving an angel - that is re-creation, that is leisure!

I conclude: the "work ethic" of the Middle Ages was Sufficiency. Yes, there were greedy men who wanted more, but the tone of that society was sufficiency of production. A tool-maker works to a thousandth of an inch. For a carpenter a sixteenth of an inch is sufficient precision. It would be a great waste of time, skill and effort for a carpenter to work to a thousandth of an inch. It would be absurd for him to do so to "create employment," or "increase exports."

Sufficiency is the message of the Gospels
"Behold the lilies of the field, they sow not, neither do they spin" - applied by the Honest Money and Just Prices of Social Credit, (the National Dividend and National Discount.) "Sufficiency" according to the social credit definition "can be measured in terms of human satisfaction."
The "work ethic" which is the antithesis of Social Credit, whether it be called "Protestant," "Catholic" or "Marxist," is that which demands MORE, irrespective of human satisfaction.

Anthony asks: What is the National Dividend for? To end poverty? I suggest this is an effect. The purpose of the National Dividend is to decentralize credit all the way back to the individual, in whom it arises as "Unearned Increments of Association."
What is the National Discount for? To reduce prices? - that is an effect. The purpose of the National Discount is to cancel out from prices the detritus of the costs of "dead labour" going all the way back to the man who first scratched the soil with a stick, rather than his finger nails."
Further reading: Economic Democracy by C.H. Douglas.

THE LATEST ISRAEL ESPIONAGE PROBE: DOES IT MATTER?

by Mark Weber: https://www.ihr.org/news/040901_weber.shtml
"The still unfolding story of Pentagon analyst Lawrence Franklin and his alleged spying for Israel has attracted wide media attention and generated considerable discussion. Details of the FBI's investigation of his activities are still coming to light. But regardless of the outcome, one thing is certain: there will be no fundamental change in US policy regarding Israel and the Middle East.
Support for the Zionist state in both the White House and the Congress is so fervent that Israel hardly needs bureaucrats such as Franklin to track the inner workings of the US government. Whether the president is a Democrat or a Republican, American policy is so tightly in the grip of politicians and government officials who are ardently dedicated to Israel and its interests that the Franklin case will make no difference.

In the current administration, a cabal of high-level pro-Israel "neoconservative" Jews -- including Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense; Richard Perle of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; David Wurmser in the State Department; and Douglas Feith, the Pentagon's Undersecretary for Policy -- played a decisive role in pushing the United States into war in Iraq. This is so widely understood by Washington insiders that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May to declare that Iraq was invaded "to secure Israel," and that "everybody" knows it.

eferring to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to openly acknowledge this reality, Hollings said that "nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on." With few exceptions, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies due to "the pressures that we get politically," he added.

In Britain, a veteran member of the House of Commons candidly declared in May 2003 that pro-Israel Jews had taken control of America's foreign policy, and had succeeded in pushing the US and Britain into war in Iraq. "A Jewish cabal have taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist Christians," said Tam Dalyell, a Labour party deputy known as "Father of the House"
because he is the longest-serving Member of Parliament. "There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States," he added.

During the 1980s, Admiral Thomas Moorer, former Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke with blunt exasperation about the Zionist hold on Washington: "I've never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them [the Israelis]. It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."

"AUSTRALIANS FOR AN INFORMED DISCUSSION ON OUR CONSTITUTION"

Dear Sir, GPO Box 64, Sydney, NSW 2001
"Your July, On Target bulletin supplement lists the terms of reference to the Bolkus republican Inquiry which invited submissions on the most appropriate process for moving towards the establishment of an Australian republic with an Australian Head of State. AIDC submits that the most appropriate process is that recommended by one of Australia's respected constitutional experts - republican colleague of Senator Bolkus, Professor Cheryl Saunders, who on p206 of 'Constitutional Politics' (UQP2002) said: It follows that, if there is to be further consideration of a republic, there should be at least three elements of the information campaign.
· The first should explain the current arrangements and the implications of the move to a republic.
· The second should explain the proposed alternative.
· The third should be designed to deal with queries that arise during the campaign, before the vote takes place.

Professor Saunders is to be congratulated for spelling out a process which is supported by both sides of the republican discussion.
With reference to her first point, we recommend readers go to: www.cefa.org.au and, re Australia's Head of State, go to www.quadrant.org.au for Sir David Smith's paper.
Her second point asks for an explanation of the proposed alternative and this is what we seek, the third point is self explanatory.

AIDC hopes you find this worthy of publication. Your Bulletin was handed to us by your subscriber Mr. Langford, for which we thank him.
Yours faithfully, S. Morgan Hon. Sec. "Australians for an Informed Discussion on our Constitution."

Editor's Note:
Quadrant we know of, but Who and What is CEF-A?
"CEF-A is a non-partisan and non-political initiative to encourage young Australians to think and learn about the history and operation of the Australian Constitution and the Australian system of government. It offers cash prizes to primary, secondary and tertiary students who enter its various competitions." Patron-in-Chief: His Excellency Major General Michael Jeffrey AC CVO MC. Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia. Executive Director: Mrs. Kerry Jones. Founding Benefactor: Father Jeremy Flynn.

PLACE ALL POLITICIANS ON SOCIAL SECURITY

"Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years," writes an American voter. While he is focussing on the American scene we are sure the overburdened Australian taxpayer relates to the following letter:
"Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it. You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan. For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die. Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments. For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw US$7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives. This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries. Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their lives.
Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA....ZILCH!!!
This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds.

"OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK"!
From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into, -every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)- we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator! Bill Bradley's benefits!

Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. That change would be to Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us ...then sit back..... and watch how fast they would fix it. If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.
How many people can YOU send this to? Better yet...How many people WILL you send this to??"

NATIONAL WEEKEND COMING UP

BOOKS, BOOKS, BOOKS

"Howard's War" by Alison Broinowski. Why did John Howard lead Australia into a highly unpopular war with Iraq? The war has cost Australians more than $700 million, so far, but has predictably made Iraq and its neighbours more unstable - and hasn't delivered any of the results our leaders 'promised'. How could it have been 'in Australia's interests' when it has made us a target for terrorism and put us at odds with our Asian neighbours? John Howard mightn't have revealed his real reasons for going to war but this book does.
Price: $23.95 posted.

"Guantanamo: What the World Should Know" by Michael Ratner and Ellen Ray. David Hicks' Australian lawyer Stephen Kenny has written as Introduction to the book. "Make no mistake, Guantanamo is a prison where cruel and inhuman and degrading treatment - even torture as we know - is practised, and it is utterly illegal," writes Michael Ratner. He warns his readers, "Alarm bells should be ringing throughout the West. Liberty, democracy and the right of dissent are at stake. The recently deceased former president Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union -- "The Evil Empire". Is America turning into a fascist state? It is just incredible the way human beings can justify their own barbaric actions! This is a must read. Price: $30.00 posted.

"Not Happy, John" by Margo Kingston. In the triumphant first-flush of toppling Saddam Hussein, John Howard invited George Bush the President of the United States to visit our shores and speak on the matter which had so bitterly divided the nation. She writes on that presidential visit: "…what I experienced on 23 and 24 October last year made me fear for our democracy's future. I saw a Parliament on its collective knees before a condescending Imperial Caesar, led by a lame provincial governor of a Prime Minister so blind to the duties of his own democratic office, so unmoved by the issues still rending his own people, that he turned what might have been a healing thank-you visit into just another vehicle for his own ambitions. I saw him do so at the expense of Westminster traditions and norms of civilised behaviour that I'd thought were above partisan politics. I saw elected politicians - elected by us, the Australian people - shouted down, physically manhandled and viciously abused."
That day, John Howard, 'conservative imposter disguised in ill-fitting Menzies hand-me-downs' kow-towing to the Imperial Caesar, "had left the public service in ruins -- reduced to mere caterers, lackies, careerists and political stooges." She saw, "The castrated press gallery was largely oblivious to what was happening to our democracy before their very eyes on their own professional beat". $30 posted.