Tuesday, March 24, 2009
social credit weighs in on oil sands debate.
For those who missed it (and I imagine most Albertans fit into this category), Social Credit Party leader Len Skowronski waded into the great Oil Sands debate in February by releasing a nine-point plan for Oil Sands development. Social Credit formed the Government of Alberta from 1935 to 1971.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Deep stuff. I'm shocked the Socreds don't have any MLAs.
ReplyDeleteAt least now we know where the NDP have been stealing their ideas from.
"Deep stuff. I'm shocked the Socreds don't have any MLAs."
ReplyDeleteI'm almost surprised this wasn't scanned off the back of a napkin, judging by the content.
Thankfully for those of us who aren't far-right, funny-money peddling fundamentalist Christians, Mr. Skowronski is a long way from being an MLA; he ran in Calgary-Bow in the election a year ago, placing dead last with 171 votes - out of the 14,808 cast in that riding.
Looks like his leadership hasn't done well for the Socreds as a whole, either. They're obviously a dying party; they ran the least number of candidates and polled the least votes in this past election, than they have in their history.
Stick a fork in them.
In hindsight, they really should have merged their meager resources with the Wildrose Alliance. If for no other reason than we could have a party with a lovely moniker like "Wildrose Social Credit Alliance"
ReplyDeleteAnon@ 2:11PM
ReplyDelete"In hindsight, they really should have merged their meager resources with the Wildrose Alliance."
I think the Major Douglas funny-money theories would've proven incompatible with the idea of the Socred remnants throwing their lot in with anyone else.
And exactly what do you know about Douglas' theories? And how are they "funny money" theories?
ReplyDeleteCould you please elaborate.
"Could you please elaborate."
ReplyDeleteNo. :)
But, to be fair, I should've put quotations around the term "funny money" to denote that it's only a derisive nickname for Social Credit theory as it was attempted (and failed) in Alberta....
... My grandmother, who's nearly 90, still gets a little red talking about those silly certificates. ;)
The issuance of prosperity certificates by the Alberta Social Credit government was based upon the monetary theories of Silvio Gesell, and had nothing to do with actual Social Credit.
ReplyDeleteSocial Credit was never tried in Alberta, because every attempt to pass legislation based upon the thoeories of C.H. Douglas were ruled ultra vires by the Supreme Court of Canada. So the statement that "Social Credit" was tried and failed is completely inaccurate.
The truth is that Social Credit was never given a chance in Alberta.
So... you're saying that social credit didn't fail -- it was social credit theory that was failed by Bill Aberhart and Ernest Manning? Gotcha.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I don't want to bother talking about Major Douglas' monetary theories (which are that -- theories), it was my response to the poster above - who mused that the Socred remnants would've done well combine their marginal resources with the Wildrose Alliance - that it's most likely those die-hards' insistance on holding on to the social credit monetary theories that precludes any such cooperation or merger. (Of course, the Alberta Socreds also push hard-right policies like teaching creation in schools, that even the Wildrose Alliance doesn't touch)...
That opinion still stands.
My point was that you labelled Douglas' theories "funny money" theories, and I took issue with that because its a typical statement by someone who is ill informed about those theories.
ReplyDeleteI will say that there is nothing funny about the present monetary system, and the current credit crises is an example of that fact.
As for the "Social Credit" Party, the vast majority of their policies have nothing to do with actual Socail Credit as they stand now, but I do believe there is an attempt to push back to its roots.
Social Credit is not "right" or "left" wing. In fact, Social Crediters view the political spectrum as a false dialectic designed to keep people in opposition to each other. As Douglas said, when you put force at two opposite extremes of an object, it revolves - you get revolution.
"My point was that you labelled Douglas' theories "funny money" theories, and I took issue with that because its a typical statement by someone who is ill informed about those theories."
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny to me is the need by some Social Credit adherants and proponents to sniff out and jump on any criticism or derision of Major Douglas' theories, and deride those who aren't believers as either morons or ill-informed.
This isn't the first time I've encountered this - almost like you have a Google Alert set up in order to patrol what anyone says about it... ;)
I do have a google alert for Social Credit, but not to sniff out any criticism on the subject, but to seek out any further information I can find on the subject or to seek out anyone discussing the subject.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I don't mind informed criticisms of Douglas' ideas, because there is a mutual dialogue and hopefully a further understanding on both sides.
Again, my complaint in this instance was the dismissive "funny money" statement which was invented in the papers in regards to the issuance of scrip which never was a Social Credit policy (it was taken from the German economist Silvio Gesell).