It suddenly struck me that Professor Jordan Peterson and C.H. Douglas were/are really ‘on the same page’ – Douglas of course eighty years ago.  Also as Jordan Peterson says in one video segment there have been great advances in the last 50-100 years in the discipline of Psychology (just as in the understanding of the social credit within societies as Social Credit teaching brings out).

In his November 1934 BBC broadcast on “The Causes of War” Douglas asked the question, “Is Our Financial System to Blame?” In answering his own question, he thought it important there should be agreement on what was meant by ‘war’ and gave the technical definition of the time:
“Any action taken to impose your will upon an enemy or to prevent him from imposing his will upon you.”

He then made the observation that that particular definition made “the motive rather than the method the important matter to consider” and lamented the fact that at that time in man’s history “more energy is devoted to the endeavour to modify the methods of war than to removing the motives for war,” and that if man would recognise that fact he would be in a better “position to realise that we are never at peace – that only the form of war changes.”

Jordan Peterson in his “Maps of Learning” series dealt with such related matters as animal and human behaviour, the psyche, the importance of myths and legends, etc., and is well worth spending the time to watch on Youtube.
Douglas noted:

"Military wars are waged by nations, a statement which is the basis for the somewhat naïve, and I think certainly erroneous idea, that you would abolish war if you abolished nations. This is much like saying you would abolish rate-paying if you abolished Urban District Councils. You do not dispose of a problem by enlarging its boundaries, and, if I am not mistaken, the seeds of war are in every village.”

The following portion of Douglas’ broadcast brings to mind some of the campaign promises Donald Trump made to the American people:
·      Ensure the return of American industry to American shores
·      Ramp up national production – get Americans back to work
·      Reduce the unemployment numbers.

But as C.H. Douglas pointed out over eighty years ago:

“We can get a glimpse of the main causes of war if we consider the problem of statesmen, who are expected to guide the destinies of nations. I suppose most statesmen at the present time would agree that their primary problem is to
·      increase employment, and to
·      induce trade prosperity for their own nationals,
and there are few of them who would not add that
·      the shortest way to achieve this would be to capture foreign markets.

But Douglas saw further than most men at the time:

“Once this, the common theory of international trade, is assumed, we have set our feet upon a road whose only end is war. The use of the word “capture” indicates the desire to take away from some other country, something with which it being unable, also, to be prosperous without general employment does not desire to part. 
That is endeavouring to impose your will upon an adversary and is economic war, and economic war has always resulted in military war, and probably always will.”

Now we come to the human psyche and behaviour. Douglas noted:

“The so-called psychological causes of war are the response of human nature to irritations which can be traced to this cause either directly or indirectly. To say that all men will fight if sufficiently irritated seems to me to be an argument against irritating them, rather than against human nature. It is not the irritation which causes the economic war, it is the economic war which causes the irritation.
Military war is an intensification of economic war, and differs only in method and not in principle. The armaments industry, for instance, provides employment and high wages to at least the same extent that it provides profit to employers, and I cannot see any difference between the culpability of the employee and that of the employer. I have no interest, direct or indirect, in the armaments industry, but I am fairly familiar with Big Business, and I do not believe that the bribery and corruption, of which we have heard so much in connection with armaments, is any worse in that trade than in any other.

So long, then, as we are prepared to agree, firstly, that the removal of industrial unemployment is the primary object of statesmanship, and secondly, that the capture of foreign markets is the shortest path to the attainment of this objective, we have the primary economic irritant to military war always with us, and,...”

Eighty years later we see the Robotic Revolution already bearing down upon us – and we haven’t even grasped the significance of what the Industrial and Technological Revolutions meant in terms of “Poverty Amidst Plenty”! We are still trying to solve 21st century problems with 19th century ideas.  Surely the right answers demand the right questions?

Douglas saw the problems nations would encounter in the future and he wrote:

“we have the primary economic irritant to military war always with us, …  moreover, we have it in an accelerating rate of growth, because production is expanding through the use of power machinery, and undeveloped markets are contracting. Any village which has two grocery shops, each competing for an insufficient, and decreasing, amount of business, while continually enlarging its premises, is a working demonstration of the economic causes of war – it is, in fact, itself at war by economic methods.

I do not believe that it is sensible to lecture the public of any or all of the nations on either the wickedness or the horrors of war, or to ask for goodwill to abolish military war or the trade in armaments, so long as it remains true that, if one of the village grocers captures the whole of the other grocer’s business, the second grocer and his employers will suffer. Or if it remains true that if one nation captures the whole of another nation’s trade the population of the second nation will be unemployed, and being unemployed they will suffer also.

It is poverty and economic insecurity which submits human nature to the greatest strain, a statement which is easily provable by comparing suicide statistics with bankruptcy statistics and business depression…

To know, therefore, whether war is inevitable, we have to know whether, firstly, there is enough real wealth available to keep the whole population in comfort without the whole of the population being employed, and, secondly, if this is so, what is it that prevents this wealth from being distributed….”

And that is where Social Credit concepts come in to play.

You can listen to the full BBC address by C.H. Douglas here…
Download the text here…

Watch Robert Klinck’s masterly paper on “The Cultural Inheritance” which will give you the right questions to ask in order to grasp the realistic Social Credit answers...

Bring on the National Dividend!