The Major Cause Of War - Our Debt Based Monetary System

[Setantii]

Major C.H. Douglas proposed a 'third way' between Capitalism and Socialism - the Social Credit movement that spread in the inter war years but is almost forgotten now, which manifested itself in the form of the 'Green Shirt's.

I found this talk given by him on the BBC in 1934 in which he argues that the major cause of war is the debt based financial system and the economic warfare that ensues between nations as they all try to increase their exports, at the expense of other nations, to pay off ever incresing debts created by the debt based monetary system still in use today.

I would be grateful for any opinions.

[Timm]

Stealing stuff from folks tends to make them angry.

[BuyInOxford]

Arent we already involved in 2 wars or at least 1.5 depending on which way you view the rebranding of the war in Iraq by Prezzy Umbongo, with Iran the most likely next target.

If there are any more wars im not fighting, unless of course its one against people who speak like him.

[DabHand]

"Endless money forms the sinews of war."

Cicero, Philippics Roman author, orator, & politician (106 BC - 43 BC).

Sounds like it huh chief?

[Realistbear]

Arent we already involved in 2 wars or at least 1.5 depending on which way you view the rebranding of the war in Iraq by Prezzy Umbongo, with Iran the most likely next target.

If there are any more wars im not fighting, unless of course its one against people who speak like him.

Allah Akbar!!!!!

There has been a war between East and West since civilisation began. It is still working itself out and will end in a nuclear exchange between East and West. No weapon system has even been invented that has not been deployed.

There is no "choice" as to which side you will or will not fight for. The war will be brought to you.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Realistbear

[Harry Sacks]

Allah Akbar!!!!!

There has been a war between East and West since civilisation began. It is still working itself out and will end in a nuclear exchange between East and West. No weapon system has even been invented that has not been deployed.

There is no "choice" as to which side you will or will not fight for. The war will be brought to you.

Sure, RB, wars over faiths, like religion and modern economics. Us non-believers get dragged in, unfortunately.

My daughter started school this term. In the first week she was taught how the world was created in seven days. I kid you not.

[Injin]

Thankyou for that. Very interesting.

Whilst monetary considerations can be a factor in war, I'm pretty sure that changing the system will not prevent such.

You don't even need fundamental reasons such as food, oil or Lebensraum. You just need two people - one of whom wants to be top dog.

I think the reason we have the monetary system we have was because it was successful in garnering resources for war - not the other way round.

I don;'t think that's quite true, or if it is doesn't fllow from the argument you make.

As taxpayers and those who lose out through inflation are the involuntary funders for war, it's hard to say it's wanted.

I think that fiat/credit/ponzi/FRB banking comes first, but then those who manage to start one up need to protect themselves (and go a bit mad with power to boot.) It's not possible to have an agressor army without a central bank and taxation. Even ceasar goes on about it. "Start a bank, ninja the money, buy and army, steal the money from someone else, pay back the loan." And people wonder why Alexander the great wept when he ran out of world to conquer.

[Stop The Ride]

Allah Akbar!!!!!

There has been a war between East and West since civilisation began. It is still working itself out and will end in a nuclear exchange between East and West. No weapon system has even been invented that has not been deployed.

There is no "choice" as to which side you will or will not fight for. The war will be brought to you.

Ummm. Nuclear missiles have been invented and have not been deployed (i.e. used).

[Toto deVeer]

Thanks for the links. It's true,

Same view in the US military too. From Smedley Butler, twice awarded the Medal of Honour, founder of the US Marine Corps:

[Injin]

Ummm. Nuclear missiles have been invented and have not been deployed (i.e. used).

Don't mind RB, he tries to misdirect every thread that looks like it has a solution to fiat money andd/or suggest gold.

Oh and you'll find him on threads where food has gone up 15% and the central bank has printed another trillion quid *****ing on about deflation.

[Stop The Ride]

Don't mind RB, he tries to misdirect every thread that looks like it has a solution to fiat money andd/or suggest gold.

Oh and you'll find him on threads where food has gone up 15% and the central bank has printed another trillion quid *****ing on about deflation.

Thanks for the hint. I'll rely on you instead to keep a structured and logical argument flowing.

[Injin]

Pot kettle etc.

I don't even know from what you wrote what you thought I must have written.

You think that central banks arises because peopel want to go to war.

I refute this by pointing out that no one wants a central bank.

I hope this is at your level.

[Injin]

Thanks for the hint. I'll rely on you instead to keep a structured and logical argument flowing.

Why?

Hardly anyone is swayed by logical rational argument.

[bogbrush]

Ummm. Nuclear missiles have been invented and have not been deployed (i.e. used).

They were used in the first nuclear war (aka World War II).

[Maddog21]

Ummm. Nuclear missiles have been invented and have not been deployed (i.e. used).

Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

[Stop The Ride]

They were used in the first nuclear war (aka World War II).

I think that if you read the history books, you will find that the atomic bombs were dropped from aircraft, not delivered by missiles.

[Stop The Ride]

Why?

Hardly anyone is swayed by logical rational argument.

Why don't you give it a go?

[bogbrush]

I think that if you read the history books, you will find that the atomic bombs were dropped from aircraft, not delivered by missiles.

Missiles have been heavily used, atomic bombs used, so you're splitting hairs over slapping one on top of the other?

And I think you'll find that using phrases like "if you read the history books" makes you look like a complete @rse.

[Stop The Ride]

Missiles have been heavily used, atomic bombs used, so you're splitting hairs over slapping one on top of the other?

And I think you'll find that using phrases like "if you read the history books" makes you look like a complete @rse.

The subject raised was about weapons systems. Nuclear missiles have not been used, which is relevant because their destructive power far outstrips the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. You are of course entitled to think what you like.

[Injin]

Thanks - I fully understand where you have got what I said wrong now.

I did not say 'peopel want to go to war'.

Leaders wanted to wage war or at least defend oneself, and in order to win that war brought forward resources from the future by establishing a central bank and FRB (William of Orange).

This doesn't seem likely to me. To want defending there has to be something worth defending and a means of paying for that defence, which means the FRB has to come first. As that's the case, it's much more likely that FRB arises, this makes a few (undeserving) men gain economic power and their choices flow from that.

You say 'no one wants a central bank'. Clearly that is self evidently untrue.

It's obviously true.

The followers don't want a central bank, it is imposed upon them. The leaders don't want a central bank, they have to use it to get what they want. This is true whenever you see force - neither side wants what's happening.

[Injin]

The subject raised was about weapons systems. Nuclear missiles have not been used, which is relevant because their destructive power far outstrips the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. You are of course entitled to think what you like.

I've got a mate with a shotgun, he's never fired it in anger afaik.

This ofc means that guns have never been used in war.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Injin

[Injin]

Why don't you give it a go?

I do.

And I don't.

Depends on the circumstances really. Wingnuts who issue snidey remarks are better off being treated as the outpatients they appear to be, ime.

[Snow Birds]

I don't think so. War is a result of surplus. When you have wealth you can go to war. However it goes much deeper than that. Humanity has faced a problem continuously since we started agriculture. When wealth is created by a small group, or if you like, we don't need the work of everybody in order to live, then we face, and have faced since the dawn of history, the problem of distribution. For the producing members of society to give their production to the unproductive they need a "service" in return. The leaders of our societies have always rapidly run out of things the producers want. In order to keep up the production the leaders must convince the producers to give their production to a worthwhile "cause".

Money and monetary systems are only a tool to accomplish this distribution. Far more important is the "cause" which must be compelling enough for the general population, including the producers, to work at. War is such a cause. If you can convince your population of an outside threat then all will work to defend themselves and even work at it to accomplish domination. Another "cause" is to please the Gods. This is similar to war because if the Gods are not happy then everyone is threatened so it is a basic survival response. This idea has produced Stonehenge, the pyramids of Egypt, the Parthenon and numerous temples including the cathedrals of Europe.

What we "need" is a "cause". They are not real needs or real causes, they are really excuses. A real reason or goal that everyone would embrace would be perfect but no-one has managed to dream that one up. Recent attempts are global warming, the Olympics and all sports, space travel, personal housing, cars, and fashion. Some future candidates are asteroid threat and alien invasion. They have all worked to a limited extent but have not been self sustaining to everyone at once.

My conclusion is that monetary systems are a by product of over production and are not important in the big picture. They come and go. What humanity needs is a real goal that everyone (or a vast majority) subscribes to and then we all work towards it. Money is only a means to an end.

[Realistbear]

Sure, RB, wars over faiths, like religion and modern economics. Us non-believers get dragged in, unfortunately.

My daughter started school this term. In the first week she was taught how the world was created in seven days. I kid you not.

The Theory of Everything postulated by Hawking suggests that the first days may have been very long indeed. Saw his proggy this week and think he is onto something when he said all of creation (yes--it must have been created because it had a beginnig from the moment of the big bang) came from nothing as anti-matter cancels out matter perfectly--it can be no other way. When it collapses it will return to nothing from whence it came. In the early days of creation the planets were unformed and in a state of void. Our solar system was formed from gasses that "happened" to come together through a form of cosmological luck (according to Hawking) which might not have occured but for a one in a billion event that must have happened or else the entire Cosmos would still lack form. I think he was cribbing from something a Jewish guy wrote in some book a few thousand years ago that people have mistaken for religion.

Must have?