Why Is David Farrar Attacking Social Credit?

Here is a tweet I found passing me by from David Farrar. Somebody wants to answer this? Why now?

14 thoughts on “Why Is David Farrar Attacking Social Credit?

  1. Social Credit is an means firstly, not an ends.

    That is why even Social Creditors have a problem agreeing on what it is they are trying to promote & do when it comes to specifics. When the means are properly understood, the age old ends will have taken on an entirely different nature, as it is for the most part something to be inherently understood on a wide basis.

    Farrar touched on a good point, people locking themselves into a room in Parliament did have nothing to do with Social Credit.

    • Yes, Social Credit is a means, not an end, but in our early days as a party the voters were ‘turned off’ by our explanations of what is wrong with the present financial system, and how SC would correct things. They wanted to know what our policy was on whatever their pet subject was. We therefore had to look at various topics, and decide what would be in the best interests of the people and New Zealand, and form policies around that, with the proviso that if the materials and manpower are available to do them, then the money would also be available with Social Credit.

      • Whatever is desirable or necessary to the betterment of mankind, provided the materials machinery and manpower are available, can be made possible by the provision of money.
        I don’t think I have worded it quite as it is in our tenets, but if you look at our website, http://www.democrats.org.nz, you will find the tenets there.

  2. Does David Farrar realise that it was Social Credit (named Douglas Credit in those days I think) which Labour used in 1935 to get New Zealand out of the big depression?

  3. Maybe we who are NOT ignorant about the effects TPPA will have on our country should lock ourselves in Parliament, or chain ourselves to the doors or somewhere so that the Nats and their poodles will know they do not have a mandate from us all to sign it. :(( (Where are the smileys?)

  4. Our members locked themselves in parliament to protest about the first-past-the-post voting system. The Democrats for Social Credit us the only true democratic party. We have led the way in many things. We were the first party with a good environmental policy (which was taken up first by the Values party, and when it became defunct, by the Green party). We were the first to put up a nuclear free NZ bill in parliament, but both the Nats and Labour voted against it. Not long afterwards David Lange put up his own bill which was passed and he has been given the credit for making NZ nuclear free. We also proposed a Financial Transaction Tax as a better alternative to GST. Now several parties are proposing FTT, with GST being taken of food and rates (not off everything as we propose). We are totally opposed to TPPA. How many people know what that is? The Nat Govt has been trying to keep it secret and now they propose to sign it in November. They will claim they have a mandate to sign it, but how can they have a mandate if very few people have heard about it until now, and do not know what it involves? We will lose our sovereignty.


  5. With 1609 votes this election, its not like they are a threat. The problem with people like Farrar is they don’t really understand the Social Credit philosophy. If I had though that Democrats for Social Credit had a snowballs chance in hell of getting close to 5%, I would have voted for them. They have great policies.

    • What I find so interesting is that he choose to make a remark like that just after the election about a party that for all intends and purposes is a dead party. They’re nuts you know. I happen to know some of their Hamilton contenders and they are anything but nuts.
      BUT… They are the only party who challenge the status quot with regards to the printing of fiat money by the big money cartel. John Key is a banker and Farrar is his bully boy publicly acknowledged by John Key. Nothing Farrar does is accidental.

      • Yep, they have their eyes wide open. They are far from nuts. I also find the timing of the comment to be very odd and I haven’t been able to fathom the point behind it. There must be a reason. Perhaps with the growing understanding by the public of the Positive Money movement, the banking incumbents are starting the smear campaign against the truth.

        • Huia pointed out that it was social credit who pushed for electoral change. And of course Farrar is trying to promote FPP politics and if there was ever an election that had a result resembling that it was this one. it might be the he is just ridiculing Social Credit in a little arrogant victory dance but I think the timing is suspect. And yes I think that globally the bankers are very aware of the growing anti Money cartel movement!

          • But it had everything to do with democracy and fairness, which the Social Crediters have always believed in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s