When I get round to writing my intellectually dazzling and profound extended essay on the hidden semiotic meanings to be found in images of local politics, rest assured the photo above – of this year’s Bristol Green Party election launch – will be taking pride of place.
But let’s forget, for a moment, that the whole thing resembles an awayday with the cake baking sub-committee of the local Baptist church’s June Family Fun Day organising team rather than a set of progressive politicians ready to take control of a sophisticated 21st century western city.
Instead can someone tell me which ward the daft plastic windmill at the right of the picture’s running in? It’ll get my vote every time.
In a straight choice between the kind of weirdo that wants to be a Bristol City Councillor and a cheap, crap inanimate object, the inaminate object gets the nod every time from the Blogger.
“can someone tell me which ward the daft plastic windmill at the right of the picture’s running in?”
Er, Windmill Hill?
“the kind of weirdo that wants to be a Bristol City Councillor”
Do you really think most Green Party candidates seriously want to be councillors?
Brilliant. I laughed out loud at that one. I’m gonna buy you a drink just for doing that if we ever meet up again some day.
Actually I think the windmill might be a Lib-dem. It seems to point in several different directions at the same time and swings around according to which direction the wind’s blowing.
what does semiotic mean?
“In a straight choice between the kind of weirdo that wants to be a Bristol City Councillor and a cheap, crap inanimate object, the inaminate object gets the nod every time from the Blogger.”
In that case, you will be pleased that so many inanimate objects have already been elected to the council – having seen a fair few council meetings now via webcast I am pretty certain that some of the councillors are in fact full size puppets that are operated via string by a person or persons unknown standing just off camera.
Just to correct you – the picture is not in fact of our candidates, that was a cover story put out by the Green Party to disguise the fact we have had to equip Charlie with his own security detail following recent revelations in campaign leaflets by the Lib Dems that Charlie is in fact “Mr Big” who with a single vote managed to destroy the entire Lib Dem aspirations for the city, ruined the world financial systems, is personally responsible for all MP’s fraudulent expenses and, not least, is solely responsible for global warming (no wonder they are so worried we might get another councillor). As a result it was felt that he needed the protection of a “crack team” of former SAS operatives to protect him (the guy on Charlie’s left is, in fact, Sgt Andy McNab proudly holding up his latest literary venture – a comic book version of Bravo Two Zero).
“progressive politicians” or “cake baking sub-committee”?
Umm….what kind of cake?
chris hutt, shut up
Half idiotic?
“…can someone tell me which ward the daft plastic windmill…”
“Ward” is the word!
BB & LW … and what does idiotic mean?
Not one of these people are ever likely to fiddle expenses or break the letter or spirit of the Cllrs code of conduct or Nolans seven principle of public life so they get my vote.
A friend of mine said to me recently that most current councillors were ‘pale, frail and stale’ – more Greens would therefore be a breath of fresh air!!
Some of us Green were at work at the time of this shoot – 😉 we are at present polling about 7 to 11% nationally.
“Some of us Green were at work at the time of this shoot…”
Yeah well Red Lettuce you old commie, propper previous planning prevents piss poor performance as they say… try harder next time.
I can’t help thinking that you should have pulled out all the stops to get that Daniella lass in there though… she’s photogenic…
I think, that I’m going to have to vote for you lot here in Easton… due to lack of any alternative of course… sad innit?
Thanks LW!
Notice the Greens are all white, I wonder if there any more BNP members lurking in there? Greens are a right wing reactionary lot despite their attempts to appear otherwise.
Hang on
I got two soakings that day to appear in that picture, as I walked from the sodding CREATE centre to Castle Park,, and then hid under a tree as a deluge came down after – all for one radio journalist to turn up
And what do I get for it? The piss taken out of me by the Bristol bloody blogger.
Pete who says the Greens are a ‘right wing reactionary party’ – oh do grow up.
I’ve had the bloody Liberals saying vote Green get Labour, Labour have said vote Green, get LibDems, now this.
Would anyone care to link us to the far left?
“Would anyone care to link us to the far left?”
Sorry Charlie… did you just mention Derek Wall?
HiCharlie,
Far left???
some people might say me 😉
eco-socialist zen buddhism rocks!
yeah rocks – like a patient in a soviet psychiatric institution!
“some people might say me”
Yeah… that “some people” would be me you commie. I mean Lollo, let’s be honest. You are part of the watermelon tendency… however, you are a part of the watermelon tendency who is working on breeding a new kind of watermelon; one that’s red on the outside too.
“eco-socialist zen buddhism rocks!”
Charlie, not only are your party a bunch of extreme leftists, but it is rapidly becoming clear that they’re mental too!
Can’t you tell when my tounge is firmly in my Cheek??
When oh when are you lot going to get it through your dogma-addled bonces that most English people do not want socialism – whether international or national (we’re not Germans for G-d’s sake). The English are far too free-thinking, independent minded and downright cussed for any kind of socialism. That’s why the socialist, qua socialist, vote is so low in the vast majority of wards or constituencies. That’s why the Labour Party had to get rid of Militant and Clause 4 before they could ever have had any hope of being elected. Your fantasies about Tony Benn entering No 10 are just that, sick sick sickhead fantasies.
Major socio-environmental change is going to happen inevitably if we’re to make it through the next decades with any shreds of decency, humanity and quality of life. But that change will not be along the out-dated and failed socialist lines, I’ll wager.
“I have been politically engaged since the early sixties, and during that time the left has never been weaker or more fragmented than it is today.”
“So there is a vacuum on the left and, with the exception of activism within the trade unions, no consensus among socialists on which way to move forwards organisationally.”
“It is even possible that we in Green Left will succeed in moving the Green Party away from the electoralist anoraks and towards a more explicit understanding of the socialist implications of its egalitarian, environmentalist and fuzzily anti-capitalist program and recognition of the role it could play in rebuilding the left.”
Sean Thompson ex-Respect and Socialist Alliance on Derek Wall’s blog.
http://tinyurl.com/qcvrr9
“How many Trotskyists does it take to change a light bulb?
Doesn’t matter, they always smash it.” Tom.
“What happens when you put four Trotskyists in a room?
They form three parties and one entryist faction!” Gerry Hix.
http://tinyurl.com/p29njm
You lot are just shameless entryists who care far more about your simplistic socialist dogma than about the environment. You’ll probably end up smashing the Green Party like you wreck your own parties. You may fool yourselves that you’re riding high at the moment (just like the BNP fool themselves) but this is just because people are so very, very pissed off with the three main parties. But the public are far smarter than swappies, and it won’t take too long before people will see through the deceit.
If progress on environmental reform is set back it’ll be you lot to blame!
“Can’t you tell when my tounge is firmly in my Cheek??”
Lollo, I don’t care if your tongue is between your other half’s cheeks… you’re still a commie.
Mr Bolthead, read carefully the information provided by Kebab woman… are these the sort of extreme leftists with which you wish to be associated?
Ken Livingstone was very funny when taking part in a panel discussion at last year’s Green Party Autumn Conference. Before taking questions from the floor, The Chair suggested that those intending to leave the hall to attend a fringe meeting of Green Left should take this opportunity to do so.
“Ooh…” said Ken in mock surprise.
“You have factions!”
Of course we have factions, we’re a political party. There is a healthy argument between the various idealogical traditions, and you should not assume that statements from the likes of Sean Thompson have any great resonance outside their own coterie.
I see myself as a libertarian socialist, don’t consider myself a Marxist – the Green Party is fairly broad and democratic to a fault.
I’d agree that traditional socialism has failed, but capitalism is hardly healthy is it?
Labels aren’t always helpful and I understand Donna’s sceptical view of Socialism – much of what has been identified as such was really terrible!
Donna I’d be interested to hear what alternatives you advocate I can agree with you on this :
“Major socio-environmental change is going to happen inevitably if we’re to make it through the next decades with any shreds of decency, humanity and quality of life.”
How then?
In December 1942, Himmler released a decree “On the Treatment of the Land in the Eastern Territories,” referring to the newly annexed portions of Poland. It read in part:
The peasant of our racial stock has always carefully endeavored to increase the natural powers of the soil, plants, and animals, and to preserve the balance of the whole of nature. For him, respect for divine creation is the measure of all culture. If, therefore, the new Lebensräume (living spaces) are to become a homeland for our settlers, the planned arrangement of the landscape to keep it close to nature is a decisive prerequisite. It is one of the bases for fortifying the German Volk.33
Nutter!
Deear Pete, doubtless we can all see what you’re trying to insinuate here.
You might like to read a book which won “strangest title of the year” a little while back; “How Green Were the Nazis”. My reading of it gathered the answer “not very”.
http://tinyurl.com/q623uy
CM “you should not assume that statements from the likes of Sean Thompson have any great resonance outside their own coterie.”
Well I’d like to hope not, but the socialists seem to have such very big mouths (yes I know, pot calling kettle and all that, but being in a minority’s minority of a minority does that to a person) that the impression given is most unfortunate.
RV “I’d be interested to hear what alternatives you advocate I can agree with you on this :
“Major socio-environmental change is going to happen inevitably if we’re to make it through the next decades with any shreds of decency, humanity and quality of life.”
How then?”
Well I haven’t got a full manifesto worked out! However, there is an old saying “when given a choice between A and B, choose C.”
The fact is that there’s a lot more to life than this bleak false dichotomy of “capitalism versus socialism.”
May I suggest that you take a look at the Systemic Fiscal Reform idea:
http://www.systemicfiscalreform.org/
As you can see from the logo on the upper right-hand side of the front webpage it has cross-party support. I won’t pretend to have a strong grasp of the issues, and doubtless there’s a lot more work to be done on all aspects, but there could be a great potential for cutting loose from the outdated economic models that have been in use since ww1 – the models that have gotten us into this mess.
Whatever else, innovative thinking and adaptation is definitely required now, along with the best of traditional knowledge.
Donna I have no problem with fiscal reform ideas, perhaps they can form part of the solution. Social Credit has been in part tainted by some of the racist views of some of its advocates such as Major Douglas. (Just as Socialism has been tainted by Leninism/Stalinism)
Just had a Labour leaflet through the door attacking Lib Dem John Kiely’s record – fair enough…
However the photo on the back features 2 Green Party Candidates (including the Easton Candidate) , a Respect supporter and the late Pete Taylor, who I don’t think would have been too happy to be used in Labour propaganda.
As an old socialist once said:
“We are all in the Gutter, however some of us are looking at the stars!”
Now, let’s start! Lollo, I was just about to put a comment up about this shameful, disgusting bit of propaganda, but you beat me to the draw.
I can’t stand the opportunist, sneaky, all things to all people Lib Dems. I don’t like the two bunches of commies – the Greens and Respect who are standing here in Easton. I’m no fan of the modern Conservative party with its greedy Austrian economic model. However, the shit that has come through my front door from the deceiving, lying, blagging toe rags in the Neo-Labour-Nazi party takes the fucking biscuit!
As Lollo Rosso points out, the photo on the back of the leaflet uses members and supporters of other parties, as well as Pete Taylor… BUT, in his criticism of the leaflet, Lolo is far too fucking nice. The sly shit-bags who wrote this leaflet are blatantly trying to associate the photograph with the campaign to stop BRT, when the truth is, that the photo was connected to the campaign to stop BCC – under Neo-Labour-Nazi control at the time this photo was taken – from flogging the strip of land adjoining the Chocolate Factory off to Mr George Ferguson Divis!
This photo has nothing to bloody well do with BRT at all. This is a dirty, filthy, low trick, to use the image of a recently dead, and well known local activist to tell lies in this way.
Whoever thought this sly trick up, I hope that you go to fucking hell and suffer for eternity.
EAST BRISTOL LABOUR PARTY, YOU ARE FUCKING SCUM!
Can we get this leaflet scanned?
Yes we can!
How Green Were the Nazis? examines the overlap between Nazi ideology and conservationist agendas. This landmark book underscores the fact that the “green” policies of the Nazis were more than a mere episode or aberration in environmental history.
What do the following all have in common:
– Jorian Jenks (1889-1963), leading member of the British Union of fascists
– Harold Massingham (1888-1952), agricultural writer, member of the Council for Church & Countryside, Kinship in Husbandry, fascist supporter.
– Rolf Gardiner (1902-71) Nazi sympathiser and member of several far-right groups.
All were founding members of the Soil Association.
This does not mean Charlie Bolton, Jonathan Porritt or any other Green party members in Bristol are Nazis. Every political movement has its embarrassing uncles. Might as well own up to them.
Scan will be on its way!
On” Environmentalist” Nazi’s you forgot Henry Williamson author of Tarka the Blackshirt.
Then again Oswald Mosely was in the Tories an Labour before he formed the British Union of Fascists and Lloyd George Liberal hero was quite keen on Hitler for a bit. – All a bit academic when real fascists like the BNP and BNP lite (English Democrats) are standing in Bristol.
Lizard you aren’t the only Easton resident to be Livid !
Can anyone confirm that the picture used by East Brstol Labour Party is the same as that previously published by Bristol traffic here? –
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3217/2844062844_6892f85952.jpg?v=0
On the face of it it sounds outrageous that they should use a picture of a recently deceased Green Party campaigner to promote their cause.
Hi Chris,
Looking at it closely it isn’t exactly the same shot – I was there and it was taken at the same time.
Some people will do anything for votes!
Looks like same event, but different frame to me Chris.
Whilst we’re still on the subject of the leaflet though, on the article underneath the one about the cycle track, Mr Arif decides to have a go at the Lib Dems about their national, as opposed to local policies. Well, two can play at that game. When Tony Blair came in, he did so chanting the mantra “Education, education, education”.
If I may quote from the leaflet “All too often this means less PCSO’s on the streets”. Less PCSO’s? Less PCSO’s. It should say “All too often this means FEWER PCSO’s on the streets” you illiterate cum-bubble!
Oh yeah… being as this has all come up, what is happening with the land sale? Didn’t fat Gary say that we’d hear about this soon… have I missed summat, or was he talking cobblers? Details anyone?
This leaflet is pretty low. Mind you similar is going on with the Lawrence Hill Labour leaflets, which are full of old, out of context pics of community campaigners…apparently praising Brenda Hugil! Very unlikely, methinks. Designed by the same team though, methinks. Probably not Bristol East Labour though, methinks.
clue: check boundary changes – is the same team that gave us the Busharat special in 07.
Rosso, C.H. Douglas was not an “advocate” of Social Credit, he invented it!
Specifically, what “racist” views did C.H. Douglas possess?
@Get out:
From my decades of living in Lawrence Hill, I can confirm that Brenda Hugill is not seen in the ward EXCEPT when tempted out by cameras at election time. Her literature is similarly misleading and full of so much rot that it currently graces the bottom of my brown recycling bin.
Who’s her agent?
For Jim,
yes he was the inventor, here are some articles on the issue. Personal view is tht C H Douglas was deply Anti Semitic, but most Social Creditors today are certainly not!
http://amadlandawonye.wikispaces.com/Social+Credit,+Ecosocialism+of+Fools,+Derek+Wall,+Capitalism+Nature+Socialism
http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css/Css_38_1/BRsocial_discredit.htm
http://douglassocialcredit.com/franceshutchinson.php
For Jim,
yes he was the inventor, here are some articles on the issue. Personal view is tht C H Douglas was deply Anti Semitic, but most Social Creditors today are certainly not!
Try googling –
Janine Stingel.
Hi Rosso:
I am aware of Janine Stingel. I, along with a colleague wrote the article at Wikipedia, and Janine is mentioned in the article.
Go to the section on “Relationship to Anti-Semitism”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit#Relationship_to_anti-Semitism
Anyone who uses terms like “International Jewry” and takes the “protocols of the elders of zion” seriously is obviously anti -semitic.
Doesn’t mean that there isn’t anthingto be said for social credit, the basic idea seems good to me.
Hi Rosso:
Everyone can invent their own definitions, but the term “anti-semitism” acutally means someone who is opposed to, or against, semites.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, whether fake or not, are a document in relation to Zionism and Communism. The term “international Jewry” is in reference to people of a certain mindset who believe that there should be no nations (i.e. communists). To deny any relationship between communism and this mindset is to hide one’s head in the sand.
Douglas did not even mention anything in relation to Jews until his fourth book, “Social Credit”, and even then it was but a few sentences.
Douglas mentions “Prussianism” many times, especially in his first book “Economic Democracy”, but I haven’t seen anyone accuse Douglas of “anti-Prussianism” – interesting, because it seems that only one group of people is above any form of criticism. As the article suggests, never was there any “retribution” advocated against any group.
Further, Janine Stingel’s assertion that Douglas’ theories were totally dependent on an anti-semitic conspiracy theory are ludicrous and don’t even deserve rebuttal, because it’s painfully obvious to anyone that has read Douglas, that her assertion is entirely false. Unfortunately, this is what passes for “scholarship” today, and I’m sure her “peers” who reviewed her work were even less familiar with Social Credit than she was.
I have an entire site devoted to the subject, but you will not find the mention of the word “Jew” once.
Hi Jim,
The fact that you entertain the possibility of the “Protocol’s “being a genuine document means I am still sceptical to say the least. I’m sure that most social creditors today are not anti- semitic although figures like Alistair McConnachie certainly are.
A link between Zionism and communism ??? –
are you serious – that really is anti semitic conspiracy crap – witness the arguments between a large proportion of the left (who take an anti-zionist position) and pro Israelis!
Zionism is by nature a nationalist creed and Communism an Internationalist one –
The actual economic idea, as I said may be worth exploring – however get over the fact that some people may have good and bad ideas at the same time. Henry Ford was an anti-semite, but was good at producing cars, Ezra Pound was a vile fascist but in my opinion a good poet, C H Douglas clearly did fall (as a large number of people at the time did) for anti- semitic consipiracy, or he wouldn’t have taken the Protocols seriously would he?
Stingel may have overplayed her hand in considering that Social Credit is entirely dependant on anti -semitism. However by you giving some credit to the ideas of their being an “Internation Jewry” will immediately cause suspicion that you fall for anti semitic baloney.
Perhaps Social Credit can make some headway as an idea if its advocates drop some of the attendant conspiritorial ideas and stick to the basic economic idea which I recon has something in it.
I know quite a few pro Social Creditors who are not anti-semites at all, but if they own up to the fact that Douglas was a flawed human being with a pretty interesting economic theory then his ideas may have made more headway than they have.
– we are a bit off subject now! 😉
Never mind that (imo) … your discussion is interesting!
It doesn’t seem to me that any equation was being made between Zionism and Communism at all. What I read is something quite different:
“The term “international Jewry” is in reference to people of a certain mindset who believe that there should be no nations (i.e. communists). To deny any relationship between communism and this mindset is to hide one’s head in the sand.”
Myself, I don’t feel that all this witch-hunting over people who lived in many ways, in a very different cultural context from ourselves, and who are not here to speak for themselves, is productive.
Furthermore, and sorry to repeat this, but it seems quite important to note that, as Richard Griffiths pointed out in “Patriotism Perverted: Captain Ramsay, the Right Club and British Anti-Semitism 1939-1940”
“In certain respects … there is an enormous gulf between then and now, which manifests itself most clearly in the preconceptions which governed social interactions, preconceptions which were often betrayed by the discourse used in everyday speech. Nowhere is this gulf more evident than in the behaviour, and discourse, relating to the Jews.
The Holocaust was to be the catalyst, in almost every nation in Europe, for a revolution in discourse and behaviour …” (p12)
And, perhaps even more shocking for the modern mind, he begins chapter 3 with the following;
“Pro-Nazism had been a common feature in wide areas of British public opinion in the years 1936-9 …”
The whole of chapter one is an examination of “anti-Semitism in Britain in the thirties”, and the sad fact is that it was so widespread amongst British people then, as to be almost the norm, particularly in the form of what Griffiths calls “social anti-Semitism”.
Donna – Granted anti -semitism in the 1930’s was sadly widespread in the UK as well as on the continent.
Why the use of the term “International Jewry” why not call communists – communists? – The very ideas that Jewish people are part of some conspiracy is at the root of many anti -semitic slurs. Jewish people of course hold all political opinons, from far right to far left, from ultra- orthodox to atheist, pro and anti Israel etc…
Still I do think some of Douglas’s economic theories could have something in them, it would be helpful to its advocates if the dealt with the issue of his anti-semitism and moved on. The idea of social credit perhaps now is more relevant than ever, with the massive expansion of debt money and credit.
RV, it looks to me like Jim’s link answers your question. It’s an “abstractionist” and collectivist mindset or outlook is the point they’re making, imo. From the little I know, it appears that, in the early 20th C, Communist movements were often dominated by people of Jewish extraction. Not so surprising really also, when you think of the horrendous shit they used to get from autocratic governments like that of the Czar.
Anyway on a sunny saturday morning, if you like literature and the Gothic, you might find this Jewcy article amusing:
http://tinyurl.com/luy59z
Interesting link –
Jewish people were prominernt in early 19th Century radical movements of many kinds, as you say not surprising considering the widespread often violent anti-semitism they faced – also the fact that literacy levels were higher than average eben in the poorest Jewish communities – due to Torah learning, so literate people were perhaps more open to new and radical ideas.
Here’s a Harry’s Place article on McConnachie:
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/12/08/fascists-and-trots-debate-at-hizb-conference/
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3150
Some more stuff on the subject
Hello Dona and Rosso.
I was apprehensive to respond again, because I did not want to hijack the thread, but since you have continued the debate, I will add some comments.
I want to state that I wrote the section in Wikipedia on Social Credit and its relationship to anti-semitism.
Firstly, Douglas was critical of other ideas that manifested themselves through people, including “Prussianism” (my fore-fathers were Prussian), yet you don’t see me and others accusing Douglas of “anti-Prussianism”. This is due to the fact that his comments were an accurate description of that mindset.
Douglas’ criticism of the Jews was in relation to their philosophy, and how it differs from Christian philosophy. Jews talk of G_d as if he is some abstract being that words cannot even describe (hence, the use of the term G_d). Christians believe that God was incarnated in the flesh in the persona of Jesus Christ.
How does this matter?
It was Douglas’ belief that this form of abstractionist thinking on behalf of the Jews allowed them to place abstractions, such as the state, above individuals.
To the Christian, the individual is the most important factor in any society. Social Credit philosophy is best summed by Douglas when he said, “Systems were made for men, not men for systems, and the interest of man, which is self-development is above all systems, whether theological, political or economic”.
This places Social Credit in direct opposition to communism, and it is why people like Derek Wall are so animate about trying to discredit Social Credit. Yet you don’t see Mr. Wall talking about Marx’s work entitled “On the Jewish Question”. Nor do you see Mr. Wall talking about all the people that the communists killed. Google the name “Lazar Kaganovich”.
Brining this debate back to the Green Party. Social Credit is really the only solution to the environmental problem. Socialists still advocate a full employment policy, whereas, Social Crediters believe that as capital replaces man in the productive process, man should be free to consume more leisure (this is true freedom, the ability to contract out). I don’t know about you, but I consume most of my gasoline going to and from work.
It has been brought to my attention that someone going under the name “Rosso Verde” has stated in this thread that I, Alistair McConnachie, am “certainly”, “anti Semitic”.
This person does not justify this defamatory statement in any way.
If this person is referring to my position on the Holocaust then he/she should consult my web article
http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/features/articles/manifesto07/mystand.html
posted on the 11 April 2007 (2 years ago) before making such statements.
Alistair McConnachie
http://www.sovereignty.org.uk
The problem with Social Credit organisations – including the Secretariat in Britain – is that even those among its ranks who aren’t antisemites can’t honestly come to terms with their movement’s grubby history, and come up with these tortured explanations about how Douglas was “anti-Judaic” (’Judaic’ being a synonym for centralisation) rather than antisemitic. The fact that most leading Social Crediters around the globe since WWII have been antisemites and racists seems to pass them by.
There may well be something to aspects of Douglas’s economic theories, but I suspect that orthodox Social Crediters (even the non-antisemitic ones) are not going to be able to sell the product until Douglas’s poisonous legacy is confronted and acknowledged.
Sorry the last thing I posted was taken from a posting in the Socialist Unity thread, but sums up my feelings on the issue.
Hi Rosso:
Specifically, what “grubby history”? You made the assertion that Social Credit has a “grubby history”, and I would appreciate specifics to justify that remark.
I find it interesting that socialists claim that Social Crediters can’t come to terms with their “grubby history”, but I don’t see too many socialists coming to terms with their history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism
Truly, there isn’t really any comparison.
… and there I was walking down Church Road the other day… leaning up against the wall outside the pub was a bloke wearing a t-shirt with Chairman Mao emblazoned on the front… how many people was that shitbag responsible for murdering? Then there’s all the fuckers who wear Soviet stars on their hats as fashion statements… what would you say if they wore swastikas Lollo? But a red star’s ok? Why is the symbol of one bunch of murderers chic, but the symbol of another bunch not?
And have you noticed how the same fuckers who came up with the idea of eugenics, then criticised the Nazis for doing what they themselves advocated? Pots and kettles or what?
I fucking depise the dishonesty of socialists!
Rather than being an original and important economic theorist, as his supporters imply, Douglas parallels a wider tradition of anti-semitic populism which has been particularly important in the US and Canada.
Populism is confusing because in its call to hear the voice of the people, it combines features from left and right. Social justice is mixed with scapegoating, religious fundamentalism and nationalism with calls for direct democracy. Like socialism or fascism its manifestations can be heterodox.
Populism need not be anti-semitic, but a major strain of populism argues that an elite of bankers has conspired to enslave “ordinary folks” using the tool of “usury.” Indeed, an important feature of US populism that stretches back to the Populist Parties of the 19th century is an obsessive joint concern with money and conspiracy. In 1873, the de-monetization of silver was condemned as a crime perpetrated by a “cabal” of English, Jewish and Wall Street bankers. In turn the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 fuelled populist paranoia. In the 1920s, Henry Ford criticized Jewish bankers and called for workers and manufacturers to make a common cause against finance. In 1935, Father Dennis Fahey published The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, which reinforced the ideas that an international Jewish financial conspiracy was working to dominate the world.
The most important US populist of the 20th century and the closest equivalent to Douglas was Father Charles Coughlin, the radio priest of the Depression era. Coughlin was a radical who rallied millions of ordinary Americans to his crusade to rid the US of poverty caused he argued by corrupt politicians, over corporations and arrogant bankers. He started firmly on the left as an advocate of Roosevelt’s New Deal but frustrated by his inability to influence events moved to Fascism during the 1930s.
Coughlin was yet another under- consumptionist who believed that currency reform could be used to boost the economy. Between 1933 and 1934, he produced proposals to increase the money supply and to base money on “real wealth” instead of precious metals. He argued that the US government should sack the private bankers who ran the Federal Reserve. Coughlin, contrasting productive capitalism with parasitic finance, argued:
On the one side tenaciously clinging to the past were the speculative bankers, the credit inflationists, the gamblers with other peoples’ money.
Opposing them were the battalions of the exploited — the deceived investors, the small depositors, the anxious industrialists, the hard pressed merchants, the laborer and the farmer.
Coughlin is a key figure for third positionists and his 1934 slogan that declared that both capitalism and communism “are rotten!” continues to inspire modern neo-Nazis. By 1938 his newspaper Social Justice was defending the Kristelnacht pogrom and re-publishing The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
From the 1950s, Willis Carto, inspired by the ideas of the American Nazi Francis Parker Yockey, used his journal the Spotlight to argue that Jewish financiers were part of a conspiracy with the Bilderburg group and the Trilateral Commission to dominate the world. A.K. Chesterton’s title, The New Unhappy Lords, suggests the conspiracy has been used to destroy the British Empire, drawing upon Coughlin, Carto, and Fahey and as we have already noted, Douglas.
The British League of Rights established Bloomfield Books, which has promoted Douglas’s books along with Holocaust revisionist titles, the Protocols, a massive range of populist conspiracy texts and even Mein Kampf. The League of Rights also encourages supporters to subscribe to Spotlight. The Bromsgrove Group, an alliance of varied monetary reformers, contains the Christian Ecology Group, Green Party Economics Working Group, as well as right wingers such as Don Martin from the League of Rights and Alistair McConnachie. James Gibb Stuart acts as convener. His book The Lemming Folk is a conspiracist’s bible, which promotes once again the populist message that the “money power” links capitalism and communism with its plan for world domination. The book, which has been promoted by the far right British National Party, also praises apartheid,
“it means separate development — not racism, or repression, or institutionalized violence, or the eternal social and economic subjugation of one race by another. It was adopted in South Africa some thirty years ago because a white minority saw it then as the only means by which they could preserve their culture and their identity.”
During the 1970s Stuart supported Rhodesia’s white government who he saw as a target for the conspiracy because of their financial independence. His associate Alistair McConnachie, suspended from the UK Independence Party, an anti-European Union group, after writing to the Scotsman newspaper to question the Holocaust, edits Prosperity, a social credit/monetary reform newsletter widely promoted in the green movement. McConnachie, who was a member of the Douglas Secretariat during the 1990s, and remains active in monetary reform circles, is reported to have stated, “I don’t accept that gas chambers were used to execute Jews for the simple fact there is no direct physical evidence to show that such gas chambers existed.”
Through contact with far right monetary reformers former Green Party national speaker David Icke has been advancing populist conspiratorial ideas complete with accounts of Jewish bankers funding both the Bolshevik revolution and Hitler’s regime.
Icke notes:
“Some research I have seen claims that of, 388 members of the Russian Revolutionary Government in 1918, only sixteen were Russians by birth. All but two of the rest were Jews from elsewhere, mostly from New York.”
In turn he suggests:
“if you control the financial system, undermining a country to prepare the ground for revolution is no problem. The 1929 Wall Street crash in the United States was similarly engineered. The Brotherhood bankers created inflation and encouraged the stock market to overstretch itself, so making a crash inevitable.”
The bizarre nature of Icke’s message makes it easy to dismiss, yet he has attracted large audiences on his global tours. Icke is an heir to Douglas and both show the dangers of anti-semitic conspiracy. The bankers’ conspiracy is a stable of far right politics on a worldwide scale and the term “usury” has been used to justify pogroms for centuries.
The above is pinched from Derek Wall 😉
Still Social Credit is an idea that can work, just drop the conspiracy crap and stop hanging out with fascists! (Not that I’m accusing anyone hear personally of this)
Lizard I despise Mao and Stalin and have no time for Lenin or Trotsky either. More of a Libertarian Socialist in the Tradition of Edward Carpenter, William Morris, Emma Goldman and Murray Bookchin.
The Guy wearing a Mao T-Shirt – I admit I share your attitude, what a prat.
Hi Rosso:
I wouldn’t quote Derek Wall. Are you familiar with the logical fallacy known as “the strawman argument”? That is what Derek Wall commits above. Social Credit is not an “unconsumptionist” populist movement. I fairly certain that Derek Wall has not bothered to read anything written by Douglas.
Derek Wall is a communist, and has no way of attacking Social Credit, so he creates a straw man argument, or he uses ad-hominem.
I have debated Derek on his blog. He fails to recognize that Karl Marx has a work entitled “On the Jewish Question”:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/index.htm
He states that Douglas said some “vile” things, but when presses as to what these were, he never responded.
As Finlay stated in his book Social Credit: The English Origins, ““Anti-Semitism of the Douglas kind, if it can be called anti-Semitism at all, may be fantastic, may be dangerous even, in that it may be twisted into a dreadful form, but it is not itself vicious nor evil.”, and “It must also be noted that while Douglas was critical of some aspects of Jewish thought, Douglas did not seek to discriminate against Jews as people. It was never suggested that the National Dividend be withheld from them.”
So there you have it. Douglas was critical of some aspects of Jewish thought, but never advocated harming them in any way.
How many people have communists murdered?
As Lizard Watcher points out, Derek wall is another dishonest socialist.
“Edward Carpenter, William Morris, Emma Goldman and Murray Bookchin”
Emma Goldman and Murray Bookchin surely qualify as anarchists.
Edward Carpenter and William Morris were around before socialism’s worst atrocities had been committed, or if already committed, recognised.
Furthermore, William Morris was seriously disillusioned with socialists/socialism at the point of his untimely death, and many people count him also as an anarchist anyhow.
This word socialism is associated with so much bad shit … why cling on to it?
Jim, I’m amused you accuse Derek Wall of using Ad Hominem arguements then use them against him! It remains a fact that many figures supportive of Social Credit are racist anti-semitic nationalists – from Ezra Pound to Alistair McConnachie (so rightwing he was kicked out of UKIP)
I take a different line from Derek on Social Credit in the fact I think it is redeemable from its anti-semitic past, but some of its supporters seem to have a blind spot on the deep antisemitism of some, if not all the movement. (Some of my friends are social creditors)
Donna –
I call it Libertarian Socialism some people call it Anarchism. In fact I spent most of my twenties calling myself an anarchist.
“calling myself an anarchist”
And what did other people call you?
Why change anyway?
Lollo “In fact I spent most of my twenties calling myself an anarchist.”
Kebab “And what did other people call you?”
Same as now… commie!
… you must understand, I have a deep seated psycological need to be offensive.
What? Like the deep seated psychological need so many people seem to have to post two comments … one after the other …?
… couldn’t you get it all in one …
Or is it a man thing?
He He! 😉
Hi Rosso
Derek Wall is the one who started the ad-hominem attacks against Douglas, as well as the dishonest use of a strawman argument against Social Credit.
Personally, I do not care what Ezra Pound or someone else who has latched on to Douglas’ ideas believes. It’s irrelevant to the discussion.
The discussion in on Douglas and Social Credit. If somone likes my ideas and commits murder, does that make me a murderer?
Douglas was not an anti-semite. Social Credit is the only viable economic solution to the degradation of the environment, and the reason why people like Derek Wall are so animate about discrediting Social Credit is that they know it.
Derek Wall… hmmm!
Having had a number of in depth conversations with Derek Wall over the years… thankfully not during the last decade, my own personal judgement (and this is not an ad hominem attack, but rather a fair statement of my impressions), is that he regards “building socialism” as being fundamental to green ideas, to the extent that if it’s not socialist, then it can’t be really green?!?!
I do not like, or trust the man. Furthermore, I have had the misfortune to hear a tape recorded by friends of Derek Wall at a green camp some years ago. Derek Wall appears on said tape proclaiming the ensuing noise to be “a marxist pagan jamming session”. He took a central part in the racket… anyone who has it in themselves to create such a cacophony must be rotten to the core!
Hi Lizard:
Thank you for confirming my suspicions.
I’ve never been involved with the Green Party, but I do believe that our currenty financial system makes it imperative that we produce “junk”, export, or engage in war in order to distribute incomes necessary to buy the goods and services we do desire. Read the section on “economic sabotage” in the Wikipedia article on Social Credit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit#Economic_theory
You might also find the following article on Social Credit and the environment very interesting:
http://www.sacredconnections.co.uk/Economic%20awareness/Financeandenvironment.htm