People such as our own Peter West, who seems to be having a spiritual crisis and "dark night of the soul" view social credit as a product of modernity. In Pete's darkest moments when he speculates about the end of human civilization from "problem overload" he seems to think that social credit will also be impossible. He urges us to save civilization and our race or else there will be no possibility of social credit surviving. There is no doubt that there is good reason for such a concern, but even in the worst case scenario as depicted in apocalyptic movies and TV such as The Road (2009) and AMC’s The Walking Dead would all hope really be gone? Does the end of this world spell the end of all hope?
"Social credit is as old as man", is the title of an article by Geraldine Starky published in The New Times, July 13, 1956. The title of the address given to an English Toc H branch is informative. Social credit is not just about the control of credit in capitalism: "Social credit is the belief that in association we can get the results we want, and this naturally implies the best and happiest results". Social credit links the concepts of efficiency, human satisfaction and society as follows: social credit is "the efficiency measured in terms of human satisfaction of human beings in association or in society". A profound definition indeed, jam-packed with meaning.
Further, it is an account consistent with other social credit great thoughts. For example, Geoffrey Dobbs in What is Social Credit? says, as Dewi Hopkins summarizes in a review that "social credit is basically the good faith that exists among people, grounded in a faith in the goodness and reason of God and His creation". (Home, January 1982, p.6) Social credits then arises from the Christian foundation of the universe, part of the fabric of things as CH Douglas saw it.
CH Douglas summarised in "The Philosophical Foundation of the Nation’s Credit by "CGM", a writer in The New Times Survey, September 2013, cuts to the chase by saying that an economic system exists, essentially for it to serve man or man to serve it. CH Douglas in "What is Capitalism?" The English Review, 1919, says that the essence of capitalism is that it "is not a system of administration at all: it is a system of fixing prices in relation to effort". Consequently capitalism with its unregulated financial system and advocation of free movements of capital and labour is a system where the economy dominates man. Even immigration can't be controlled because it will diminish the profits of the elites. Nor for that matter can an ordinary person with his/her limited wage buy all the things he needs: there is a massive deficiency of purchasing power.
Social credit by contrast holds that "the end (point) of man, while unknown, is something towards which most rapid progress is made by the free expansion of individuality, and that, therefore, economic organization is only a specialized activity of man, which has as its objective the production and distribution of goods and services for man's use".
Social credit thus, would operate in a primitive society, either one made by choice (i.e. the desert island scenario) or by collapse. An economy doesn't need to be sophisticated - it is just the structure by which goods and services are produced. These goods could be primitive spears used in warfare and/or hunting and the services could be as simple as perimeter protection. Thus even though social crediters are an optimistic bunch and generally stress that there is no "innate tendencies to barbarianism" and that human nature, although streaked with original sin is still primarily good rather than evil, there is still a case to be made of the relevance of social credit in the world contemplated by Peter West's worst fears. Indeed, in desperate survivalist situations it could be argued that it is even more important to circle the wagons, dig in and cooperate in association for mutual protection and survival.