Social Credit was defined by it's founder as "The policy of a philosophy". That is, it is the pursuit of certain ends, objectives, inspired by the philosophy of Social Credit. It is in no way a political party. To form a political party bearing the name, Social Credit, is to twist that name from its true meaning and make it lie.
The founder of Social Credit was a genius. He was a Scottish engineer by the name of Major C. H. Douglas. Now, from the time he began writing on Social Credit in 1918, up until the time of his death in 1952, Major Douglas never once advocated the formation of a political party as a means of realizing his great teachings either in his own country or in any other country. In fact, he even on occasions strongly opposed the formation of a party seeking power under the label, Social Credit.
Where should reside the power? Furthermore, there is a very distinct opposition between the philosophy of Social Credit and any ambition to rule others. Social Credit places prime importance in the individual, not in the governing body. Social Credit is essentially a philosophy of democracy. Now, democracy signifies the power of the people, not the power of the government. The more powerful the government is, the less powerful is the people. In totalitarian states the government is all-powerful while the people are but the tools of the government. This is what we call dictatorship. Democracy, on the other hand, true democracy, consists of a people which at all times influences the politics of the society they form, and for whom the government is nothing more than a servant. It is a historical fact that democracies came into existence precisely as a result of the effort to limit the power of the monarchies.
Consequently, power must be developed in, or restored to, the people. The people is made up of individuals. So, individuals must be made strong in order to be able to direct the politics of the country towards the common good. The more the individual is educated, vigilant, active to defend his rights and those of his fellow citizens, the stronger is democracy.
The people is not in the parliament, and it is not making the people place its confidence in a political party, or in parliaments and governments that you teach it to be self-reliant. Now, unless the people has this confidence in itself, it will remain just as it is, the play thing of factions and parties, the victim of exploiters — financial and political exploiters.
Everybody talks about democracy. But more and more the process of regimentation is setting in, the regimentation of the people for specific ends which are not of their choice, about which they have no say, and concerning which they have not been consulted either through the medium of the ballot or by any other means.
National governments base the decisions they make — and this they openly admit - upon what they call, international, concurrence. Do you and I play any part in this concurrence?
Likewise, financial and economic groups and institutions within the nation take and enforce their decisions through "economic concurrence" — which is also something above and beyond the will or choice of the individual.
What part has the person in all of this? the person, the individual who, by reason of the immortality of his being is above and superior to any group, any government or any block of governments or any form of concurrence. In fact, the contrary of what we have described above should prevail. All groups, large and small, syndicates, co-operatives, unions, associations, institutions, etc., should govern their functions and activities in accordance with the best interests of the individual who makes them up. The group should exist for the individual and not the individual person for the group. Consequently, nations should devise and execute their policies and make their decisions in accordance with the best interests of the organisms which compose them, having consideration chiefly for the most elementary cell of the national body: the family.
In other words, all decisions, all the objectives set, all ends to be pursued should primarily begin with and from the individual person; they should not be imposed upon the individual by groups or combines or parties or governments, or supranational governments.
This is what is at the basis of Social Credit philosophy, and as such it shines through all the many writing of Douglas.
Instead, then, of striving to advance the cause of Social Credit by forming a political party, lining up electors behind the candidates of the party and throwing them into combat against the candidates of other parties, how much more in conformity with the doctrine of Social Credit it is to go to the individual and help him to develop his individual strength — his intelligence, understanding, alertness, aggressiveness, his awareness of his rights and his obligations.
This is the method employed by our Social Credit movement, the Union of Electors. In place of parties which divide the electors, we employ that method which is the contrary and effects the union of electors. Such a union can never be achieved by rallying the people about various candidates who are opposed one to the other. But it can be achieved by setting up common objectives, goals which all the world is desirous of attaining.
In order to instill into the individual the essence and spirit of Social Credit culture we use, as our primary instrument, the written word as embodied in this paper and its French-language counterpart, Vers Demain. The paper enters the family circle of each subscriber periodically. Each member of the family can find in reading and re-reading it, a medium of education, a guide, a stimulus. Those who read it faithfully and carefully come to be thoroughly infused with the spirit and culture of Social Credit. As a result their personalities achieve a development they scarcely believed possible. The results achieved justify beyond any shadow of doubt the use of this means in developing the Social Credit in the individual. Where the movement is well under way this method is complemented by reunions, assemblies, personal contacts between Crediters, by which means they mutually contribute to the development of one another in the culture of Social Credit.
Through this method of developing a people with a Social Credit mentality it can be hoped with good reason that a Social Credit regime may be realized, gradually but surely. The establishment of a Social Credit regime will, according to the words of Major Douglas himself, signify the opening of a new civilization. This civilization will conserve the values presently existing but will, in addition, by removing obstacles, especially those of the financial order, make it possible for individuals to develop freely and fully.
Civilization is not a matter of changing governments. It can only come about in developing in the souls of individuals, in the way of life which it realizes in those individuals. The first Christians did not attempt, under the pretext of making progress more quickly, to form a faction to take over the government and establish Christian legislation. No, indeed. They lived Christian lives, they propagated their doctrine by every legitimate means at their disposal, especially through the example they gave and by bringing to others the message which they had received and understood. Then, one day, without there having been the displacement of one emperor by another, the reigning emperor decided to support Christianity, and Christian legislation replaced pagan legislation. Social Credit is not a religion. But it is a doctrine which is far-reaching in its effects. It will take its place in legislation when it will have sufficiently pervaded and infused the minds and hearts of citizens and when it exerts the principal influence in their social lives.
Now, in order to arrive at this stage it is not necessary that everyone should understand the doctrine of Douglas. But it is necessary that a sufficient number of the citizenry should be enlightened in and formed to the Social Credit philosophy in order to act as beacons to the others, to be the yeast which will raise the masses, to be the leaders in influencing the elected representatives of the people, whatever may be the party names of these representatives.
This is a work which has no ending. It is the work peculiar to our movement.
We regret that in the western parts of our country there have been formed Social Credit political parties; they are more likely to close doors than to open minds. Above all, they are likely to degrade the Social Credit ideal, in bringing Social Credit down to the level of a mere party whose purpose is to seize power rather than to develop the power of the people through the formation of strong and enlightened individuals.
But, some may ask, will we not make progress more quickly through electoral activity, through putting in parliament men who are desirous of realizing Social Credit?
This is pure fallacy. The very contrary is the truth. To be successful in an election in a constituency, it is necessary to rally at least a relative majority behind your candidate. You might fail. There are always the failures. Or you might succeed one campaign and fail in the next. Then, you must succeed in winning in the majority of the constituencies. This is even more difficult to bring about. Consider what happened to the federal Social Credit party from 1935 on; 17 members in Ottawa in 1935; not a single one today — and that after 23 years of electioneering!
Now the other method — that which we practice, which is the diffusion of Social Credit doctrine and the forming of individuals who are inteliligent, aggressive and active — has known nothing but progress because once a man is formed he remains so formed. And this method does not require a majority to start bringing in results.
Take any locality. Let us say that there are herein some 200 electors of whom some 100 take the trouble to vote. Using the electoral method you must have at least 75 to win the election if there are two contestants; at least 51, and probably more, if there are three. On the other hand, to arouse the people and rally them behind one specific local aim, in times between elections, requires but one man who is informed, determined, trained to action, in order to carry the day in favor of this objective. He knows how to seize the initiative, how to go to the people, how to set forth in the best light the good sense of the proposal and how to exert the necessary pressure upon the local authorities.
We have at hand many examples of this latter type of activity in Quebec and New Brunswick, especially where our movement is flourishing.
One man out of 200 is not a majority. This is true. But he is a force to be reckoned with if he is a man trained in the school of the Union of Electors. What does Social Credit signify? It signifies a man who is his own master, planning and leading his life freely, sharing, as an individual, in all the benefits accruing from life lived in society. And in order that Social Credit may thus become a reality, in order that it may become a determining factor in the body politic and social of our country it is necessary that there rise up men who are patriotic and who are determined that things shall be thus in their land; men who will personally undertake to see that they shall be so.
For this we are working, that all those who read our words and all those whom we meet may find and develop within themselves that potential force and energy which will make it possible, for them to sweep aside all those obstacles which stand in the way of the individual partaking of the fullness of that life which is rightfully his. We work to raise up crusaders who will light the fires, who will sound the alert, who will rouse up the sluggish, who will raise their voices loudly and clearly against tyranny, who will castigate injustice and drive from our midst the dictatorship of finance, who will bestir governments from their apathy, who will shout out the truth and never cease to shout it to those who neglect their duty or betray their trust.
Subscribe