Thursday, 21 August 2014 18:12

Why Social Credit is not Socialism

Rate this item
(0 votes)

One of the chief misapprehensions under which newcomers to the subject often labour is that 'Social Credit' must be some form of socialism because, after all, the phrase encompasses the word ‘social’. So that there may be no confusion, let it be made clear that in spite of the appearance of the word ‘social’ in ‘Social Credit’, Social Credit is not only not socialistic but decidedly anti-socialist.

As I explain in my book Social Credit Economics, the economics of Social Credit rejects the doctrine of class struggle, rejects the collectivization of the means of production, rejects the centrally planned or command economy, rejects the welfare state (with its mechanism of redistributive taxation), and rejects disordered and excessive forms of economic regulation. In what way, then, can Social Credit be classified as socialistic? On the contrary, Social Credit stands for free enterprise (personal initiative, the profit-motive, private property, and free markets) provided that these individualistic elements can be properly co-ordinated so as to effectively serve the common good of all individuals in a society. What Social Credit seeks is: "a society based on the unfettered freedom of the individual to cooperate in a state of affairs in which community of interest and individual interest are merely different aspects of the same thing." [1]

While the concerns that are shared by many socialists are legitimate concerns: poverty, exploitation, gross economic inequalities, environmental degradation, etc., the methods that socialists advocate are, to a greater or lesser extent, ineffective in dealing with these problems. They also tend to engender other problems as the inevitable trade-off: the loss of individual freedom, increased servility, and the centralization of power in overweening government bureaucracies, etc. Social Credit proposes that it is possible, through the type of monetary reform that Douglas had advocated, to deal adequately with the former problems without spawning these other difficulties.

 


[1] C.H. Douglas, Economic Democracy, 5th ed. (Sudbury, England: Bloomfield Books, 1974), 142-143.

Last modified on Saturday, 10 February 2018 17:58

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

Latest Articles

  • Acids, Bases, and Balance: A Chemical Analogy for C.H. Douglas’s Social Credit
    Geofrrey Dobbs’ chemical metaphor casts a brilliant light on Douglas’s Social Credit, revealing that the debt-money system is, in conjunction with an unbalanced price system, an acidic force—corrosive, unstable, and conflict-inducing. Social Credit, by contrast, provides the base money that neutralizes this acidity, infusing the economy with debt-free purchasing power (OH⁻) to balance the H⁺ of debt-laden prices. The National Credit Authority, as the economy’s alchemist, orchestrates this equilibrium, ensuring financial flows mirror real production.
    Written on Tuesday, 09 September 2025 13:53 Read more...
  • Solutions to Banker Rule: Key Monetary Conferences Slated for Fall 2025 in Canada, Chicago
    Mark Anderson Reports on Two Up-coming Conferences involving Douglas Social Credit in whole or in part: https://www.thetruthhound.com/solutions-to-banker-rule-key-monetary-conferences-slated-for-fall-2025-in-canada-chicago/
    Written on Tuesday, 19 August 2025 08:27
  • Douglas’ 2nd Proof for the A+B Theorem (The Misalignment of Accountancy Cycles)
    In The Monopoly of Credit (1931), C.H. Douglas presents his second proof for the A+B theorem, arguing that the two core accountancy cycles of an industrial economy: the creation and destruction of money (Cycle 1) and the creation and liquidation of costs (Cycle 2) are misaligned, resulting in a systemic deficiency in purchasing power. The money cycle (Cycle 1) operates at a faster pace than the cost creation and liquidation cycle (Cycle 2), creating a gap between prices and purchasing power that widens with greater dyssynchrony and narrows with greater synchrony. Indeed, if the cycles were perfectly aligned, money creation/spending and cost creation/liquidation would occur simultaneously, eliminating the gap entirely. [1] C.H. Douglas, The Monopoly of Credit 4th edition (Sudbury, England: Bloomfield Books, 1979), 46-50.
    Written on Tuesday, 13 May 2025 09:39 Read more...