MeulenBth section two
Volume II of
this correspondence, 208 pages, letters of B to M, 5, 8. 1949 - 5. 3. 1950
5.8.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
if there would be a historian among the people who
now govern England, he would direct the attention of his countrymen to the
fact, that the present situation of the Allies is the same as the situation of
Napoleon in Germany was in the year 1811.
(Winston Churchill was, among other things, also a
historian. Moreover, at least at one stage he was said to have possessed an
almost photographic memory. Neither helped him from committing numerous
misjudgements. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
His power was without limit but the oppressions by his
generals, governors etc. were so great, that many Germans said: A new war
against Napoleon, one with the aid of Russia, is the only thing which may help
us. Thus, by organisations like the
"Tugendbund" and others, the new war was prepared. The supposition of
this consideration was, that Alexander I was a liberal man, humane and
righteous.
Once Stalin is dead
and his successors treat the Germans better than they are now treated by the
Russians (Soviets! - J.Z.) (not probable but by not impossible, either), then
the war begins anew at the first fit occasion. It begins anew, inevitably, if
by accident or by the physical properties of the atomic bombs, stored in
Nevada, Canada, etc., these bombs explode by spontaneous ignition. No thing in
the world remain unaltered by time. Bombs of any kind explode one day or they
lose their explosive force.
I do not pretend
that such a development would be best for Germany, but people seldom act so as
their own best interest would demand.
The dismantling
("Demontagen" of German industrial plants, which was still much worse
in the Eastern zone, where it happened repeatedly, even after the workers had
reconstructed their machines!) produce today the same, effect as the treatment
by Napoleon I, his Continental System and his tax-impositions produced in the
years before 1813. But there is, today, no historian of any influence among the
English leaders.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
7.8.1949.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
in the whole economic world prevailed and prevails the false
opinion that a note is a loan granted by the note-bearer to the bank, and that
note-issuing is the right to raise loans from the public. This false opinion
caused the prescriptions on redeeming the notes on demand, the limitation of
the issued mount to - - say - - the threefold of the bank's own capital and, at
last, to the note-monopoly. It seemed too dangerous to entrust, to a private
enterprise, such a privilege as to raise loans from everybody and this without
the expressed consent of those who grant the loan.
The true nature of a note is that of a clearing certificate.
From that very nature follows, that the greatest amount of notes does not
require a redemption fund. Further, it follows that there must always be a
creditor who is obliged to accept the notes at par in his usual business.
("Rückstrom" ["reflux"- J.Z.] - principle.)
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
Please turn.
A clearing cannot be prevented by distrust nor can it
be fostered by trust. Any arising distrust accelerates the performance of
clearing; that's all.
As long as
legislation has not yet provided the proper laws and procedures for clearing,
the latter must be pressed into the imperfect forms of credit. It may be
compared with insurance, which, for centuries, could only be performed in this
way: The things to be insured were sold, to the company which granted
insurance. At the same time, the company sold the same things to the
insured, in case the things were not destroyed during the time of the
insurance. The price for the latter selling was lower than the price of the
sale to the insurance company, and the difference was the premium. Some
centuries after the invention of that system, it was discovered that insurance
is a transaction sui generis and now it
gets its own legislation.
(J.Z.: Containing many imposed wrongful rules, on
organisation form, supervision, securities, interest rates, investments,
entitlements, currency to be used, gold clause prohibitions, taxation,
membership and also ever changing ones, thus artificially providing a great
degree of insecurity in this sphere as well! - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
So the clearing
centre must, at the present state of legislation, lend the clearing certificates
(notes) to employers and other people.
The clearing
certificates (notes) are on demand "realized" by the bearer. A
real credit instrument is not realised on
demand.
Bth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
8.8.1949.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
the "Courrier de France", of 4.8.49, quotes from Saint Exupéry's
"Terre des Hommes":
"J' borde la Tripolitaine. Et le sable
se dore. Dieu, que cette planète est donc déserte! Quelle part de roc et de
sable. La terre est vide. Il n'est plus d'hommes quand on l'observe à des
kilomètres de distance."
Saint Exupéry is an
old aviator and became a great writer deserving the title of a philosopher,
judging by the quotations brought by the "Courrier de France".
That the world is
the contrary of overpopulated is the impression of many travellers and I think
that this impression is - - beside the statistics - - of much value.
Saint Exupéry saw
North Africa and South America. We know that both countries, in old times, had
a
population comparable in density to France or India. We know today that
the Incas were already in a state of degeneration, predecessors displaying a
degree of culture and, in consequence, of population density as today in the
best cultivated parts of Peru.
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
9.8.1949.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
in the April-issue of
"The Individualist", page 12, article "Population",
you say: "Scientific improvements have hitherto
been mainly in the direction of saving labour: They have not increased the
production per acre".
By and large you
are - - I think - - in the right. Since 1800 the production per acre has about
trebled, in England, Germany and Belgium, but the population has more than
trebled. Also, in England the grain producing area seems to have diminished.
But, as it was, since 1800 the trouble of agriculture to sell its
products, and not the problem to produce more food to offer to the population,
it was quite natural that the progress was, first of all, in saving labour and
secondly in saving seed, lastly only in increasing the yield. What agriculture
wants - - at the present state - - is gain,
not yield.
Concerning China,
Davies, in his celebrated work about China (I learnt this from Roscher)
says, that Chinese are very dextrous in tilling the ground, but are the
contrary when it comes to cultivate new land. So the heights - - in general - - are still uncultivated. Also, there are
still many swamps in the country, which are not transformed into arable soil.
From later reports and tales of personal acquaintances, I got the impression
that still nothing changed. even now. The lack of capital may be one of the
reasons, also a standard of value, as it was in the last decades, does
not invite creditors to grant long-term loans.
------------------
The main difference
between Malthusianism and Anti-Malthusianism seems to be: The latter point to
the difficulties which agriculture has to sell its produce and only
secondly to the social and political difficulties to produce (in China,
civil war, external war, robbers, inflation).
Malthusians say: There are difficulties in producing
and that all other difficulties are so trifling, that they can be neglected - -
as far as the fundamental principle of Malthusianism is concerned.
------------------
Atomic scientists
assert: It would be possible, with relatively small expenses to destroy
all of the polar ice around the North Pole. Once destroyed, it will not develop
again, at least not in some centuries. The newly won land could - - probably - - be cultivated. (J.Z.: Only
at the South Pole could land be gained thus. The radioactive pollution aspect
should not be ignored, either. Moreover, how much low land would be flooded as
a result? - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
(Maybe, sceptics will remark that the countries at the
equator will then become deserts and the countries in our zone so hot as is now
Arabia, so that, in balance, nothing is won. Maybe!)
-----------------
Meat production, in
the greatest part of Africa, is merely a question of the Tse-Tse fly.
(Greatest? - J.Z.)
-----------------
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
turn
- over
___________________________________________________________________________________________
(On the back page B. wrote the following. - J.Z.):
Let me reproduce
here, from the German Statistical Yearbook for 1937 the following numbers:
Yield of Wheat per Hectare in "Doppelzentners".
(1 hectare = 2,471 acres.
1 Doppelzentner = 100 Kilograms = 0.11 short tons = 220.46
pounds.)
Average
figures
Country 1936 1935 1930/34
_________________________________________
Great Britain &
Northern Ireland 20.6 23.4 22.6
Germany 21.2 22.2 21.6
Belgium 26.6 25.5 25.7
Denmark 26.0 31.6 28.8
France 13.4 14.5 15.5
Ireland 20.7 27.5 27.2
Italy 11.9 15.4 14.9
Netherlands 29.2 29.4 29.7
Poland 12,2 11.5 11,7
Spain 7.6 9.4 9.5
Sweden 20.8 23.6 22.8
Switzerland 17.5 24.0 21.4
Russia - 8.3 7.2
Some days ago, I
had a discussion with the editor of an agrarian monthly. From him I learnt:
In Germany it would
be technically easy to increase the yield to about 40 DZ per ha.
Technically possible it would be to increase the yield to about 50 DZ per ha.,
although not any more easily.
But to increase the yield above the present number of about
22 DZ would be economically difficult. The cost of production would rise
in some kind of geometrical proportion. For Germany it was until now much
cheaper to get the (wanted DZ? - hand-written insertion is almost illegible! -
J.Z.) of wheat from abroad than to produce it at home. To increase the yield to
about 30 DZ would be possible by the present technical means, if the price of
wheat could be increased correspondingly. It would not require very much. A
little more care in labour, more expenses to fight against mice and other
"Schaedlinge" (none of my dictionaries translates the word) (vermin,
parasites - J.Z.), better selection of seed, shortening the time from harvest
to milling the wheat, etc. would also be of great effect. Plants for sprinkling
(very effective), other irrigation improvements. The establishment of drains in
districts like Brandenburg, near rivers and lakes, would cost much money and
are not possible, but the protection of the creditor is too bad. (Gold clauses
are prohibited, first and even second mortgages are no longer possible, because
the "place" is occupied by anterior creditors.)
In Russia the
problem has been for centuries: To plough some centimetres more deeply. The
peasants would not (too much labour) and often could not. But the collective
farms manage it. (While the system holds agriculture back in many other ways! -
J.Z., 28.1.03.)
Bth.
14.8.49.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
10.8.1949.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
my mind is not so far from vanity as not to read with great
pleasure the modest contribution on pages 31 & 32 of "The
Individualist" of August-Edition, that you were kind enough at to copy
from my letters. I appreciate the honour and thank you very-much.
----------------
Page 28. "It
only the politicians will stand out of the way." Very good!!
"Let us free
the exchanges." Excellent! Let me
add: And if politicians say (as they do): "No - - we regulate
exchanges!" Then every kind of rebellion is morally permitted and the
gentlemen should know that. (They do not yet know it.) .
"Let
individuals buy as free men where they want to." Let me add, that this
freedom of buying is a personal right, which no government can rightfully take
from its subjects, and no majority from a minority, without tyrannising over
them. Every kind of resistance is morally permitted.
But now:
"If USA finds
nothing in Europe that she wants to buy, she must resign herself to the loss of
her export to Europe."
Let me use here Kant's
method of thinking and concluding: It involves a critique of the suppositions.
Who exports? The
USA?? No!!! That's merely a "facon de parler" and should not be taken
serious. Who exports? Some merchants or other people, who exercise, in
some transactions, the function of a merchant. - The USA neither export nor
import.
The single merchant
does, normally, not consider the average price level of a country. Beside: That
price level cannot be easily calculated. Experienced statisticians differ
sometimes widely, when they try to compare
the average price level of two countries or two times.
(Believe an old statistician or - - if not - - read: "The Making of Index Numbers", by Irving
Fisher, one of the most important mathematical books ever written and
sufficient to place the author among the best economists.)
From the fact that
merchants do not consider the average price level, it may already be concluded
that it does not possess the
importance ascribed to it by many economists. But the following objection seems
near at hand: Well, maybe that the average price level is not so important, but
the price of the single product is the point. Here modern economists overlook an important
circumstance. Let me explain it by a constructed example:
Let us suppose in
England everything, produced In the country, would be offered in the stores at
a higher price - -expressed in gold - - than in any store in the USA. Let us
further suppose that England wants cotton, an article not offered in English
stores. Then, obviously, there exists a price for cotton so high, that the
importer is able to buy
any goods in England, export it into the USA for a very low
price and, nevertheless, wins not only so much, that he can buy at Savannah the
same quantity of cotton which he had exported (in form of cotton goods - J.Z.)
but also makes a good profit.
Suppose, a given
quantity of cotton would, in normal times, cost in England L 100, 000. Now let
us suppose, all goods in England become so dear, that no goods - - priced in
gold - - are cheaper than in the USA, the times, consequently, becoming quite
"abnormal". The merchant sees that the difference is least at - - say
typewriters. Their price is, in London, double (let us suppose) that at New
York. Then the USA merchant demands for his cotton, instead of L 100,000 much
more, say L 1,000,000. If the English pay that, than every good in England may
be bought by the merchant to brought to New York and could there be offered at
a price much lower than the cheapest good of the same type is offered at New
York. His gain is still very considerable. The greatest is the gain if he buys
typewriters in London. He spends L 500, 000 for typewriters, brings them to New
York (I do neglect here the cost of transportation) and sells them for L 500, 000 or more exactly spoken, for the
Dollar amount equivalent to L 500,000. Then he takes L 100, 000, buys with them
the same quantity of cotton as he had brought to England and has won L 400,
000.
(J.Z.: Will the cotton producers accept the L 100,000 for
their cotton or will they discount them, seeing the low exchange rate between
US dollars and English Pounds, which would then be likely, i.e., the low
purchasing power of these Pounds in England? I think the explanation through a
change in the exchange rate between Dollars and Pounds is easier and more
realistic. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
Expressed in
abstracto (abstractly - J.Z.): There exists always a price for imported goods
so high, that the Importer is able to export with profit, may the price level
be as high as it may.
Such a transaction
it not advantageous for the importing country, but it is possible,
and if the goods to be imported are absolutely necessary, then even a tenfold
price is paid and more. It would be easy to verify this doctrine, generally
acknowledged in the political economy of some decades ago, by the development
in Germany after 1945. In that year the price - - to give an example - - of tea and coffee was about a hundred-fold of
the price before the war. And yet there
were people enough that paid this price and renounced almost all other
things, bread included. Many students
came to the University of Berlin from abroad, also from China and India. They
brought with them some pounds of tea and lived in Berlin for several months
from the sale of one pound of tea. (Their habits were modest.) From time to
time, their relatives or friends sent them a parcel with fresh tea. The service
they won was their education at the university. At that time it was by far not
as good as tertiary education at most other universities in Europe, the
library, the laboratories and the buildings being for the greatest part
destroyed and the celebrated professors teaching in 1932 having disappeared,
murdered or emigrated.
The supposition in
the cotton example is that the English are permitted to pay in Pounds, what
they are presently not permitted to do, and that the USA merchant is allowed,
by American laws, to accept the Pounds, which, as far as I know, he is not
permitted today.
(J.Z.: Also, that both are not forced to utilise only the
official exchange rates, and that the amounts used fall under the permitted
quotas and goods exchanges, etc. - Under free exchange rates and in the absence
of all other restrictions, the exchange rate would settle at a level which
would permit Americans to buy as cheaply in England as at home, and which would
make the seemingly low prices in the USA for the English buyers as expensive as
the prices in England. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
If the USA merchant demands Dollars, all is completely
changed and it is really so, that
firstly must be found out some English goods so cheap
that they can be successfully exported to the USA.
(J.Z.: Under free exchange rates Dollars and Pounds would be
continuously traded at their free market rates. On the exchanges for foreign
currencies in England or in the US, US dollars could then be bought a their
market rate with English Pounds, without any difficulties. But if pounds are
artificially and officially overrated against Dollars, by a fixed exchange
rate, prescribed by the governments and defended by its "experts",
then a "dollar-shortage" does, naturally, appear. - I was once
present at a public meeting in Wollongong, where hundreds of people, students,
journalists, "experts" and businessmen, all defended the continuance
of officially fixed exchange rates, with all their troubles, and considered freely
floating exchange rates to be quite utopian, wrong and even harmful, too risky
or dangerous. I was the only one defending them - and, naturally, did not
convince any of these "minds" full of fixed ideas. - A few years
later, fixed exchange rates were almost forgotten and floating exchange rates
taken for granted! Fashions exist also in "economic" thoughts and
ideas. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
The present "Dollar-Scarcity" in England is as
artificial as the scarcity of L-notes was in England after 1844.
"Let us free the
exchanges." (Here, particularly, the foreign exchange rates. - J.Z.,
28.1.03.)
------------------
From the
translation of an article in the "American Mercury" by H. W. Seaman,
published in the October issue, 1948, of "Das Beste aus Reader's
Digest", I learnt what a miserable standard of life the English workers
have arrived at. I think it very dangerous to further lower this
standard, now not very far from the low standard in Germany. I am convinced
that not the (seemingly) high wages in England are the real cause of the
importation and exportation troubles. The real cause is exclusively the
pernicious system of paying imports in the money of the exporters government.
(*) (This system was invented - - as much as I could ascertain - - by Rashin,
the first Czechoslovakian minister of finance, a dangerous deflationist. Then
it was taken up by Schacht, the much admired, and used, with great success, to
enslave the German workers (and not only the workers). This success aroused
such an enthusiasm of the bureaucracy in all countries (fully justified from
its standpoint), that it was adopted in all countries of the world.)
(*) (J.Z.: This requirement would be no more than a minor
nuisance - provided, exchange rates and other conditions for dealing in foreign
currencies, would be quite free, moreover, if also all kinds of private and
cooperative alternative exchange media and clearing certificates and clearing
institutions could be freely used. Then, for instance, for US Dollars and
English Pounds, there would be free Exchange Offices e.g. in London, as well as
in New York. In both cities Dollars as well as Pounds could then be freely
bought and sold, in any quantities, at floating exchange rates, roughly
providing, with their current exchange rate, a purchasing power equivalence for
both currencies in both countries. The demand that English importers pay for
their imports in US dollars could then be easily fulfilled by them purchasing
these Dollars first, with their Pounds, either at a London or a New York foreign
exchange office, one of many, privately or cooperatively run and free from any
government meddling. I am well aware that many more wrongful and absurd
government restrictions exist than the insistence of paying for imports not
with the own currency but with the exporting other country's currency. I
believe that B. did here stress this aspect all too much. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
In olden times the Pharaohs of Egypt enslaved their subjects
and abused them e.g., as pyramid builders. But for what purpose are the
enslaved European workers used? The bureaucracy which abuses them is not able
to use the workers either for pyramids nor to perform anything, but for
upholding its power.
(J.Z.: Here one should not forget the "palaces" of
the bureaucrats, often built at huge costs, never even minding huge over-runs
of the original cost-estimates and the often luxurious furnishings in the
offices of the higher bureaucrats, nor their relatively high earnings, fringe
benefits and pensions. Not only their power urges get satiated, involuntarily,
by the victims of their taxation, legislation and regulation powers. - J.Z.,
28.1.03.)
If I would concede
the errors of modern economists to be truths, then I would have to give up the
principles laid down in the immortal work "Free Banking" (J.Z.: Here
he 'lays it on', rather thickly! - but it may have helped, as an
"argumentum ad hominem". - J.Z., 28.1.01.), which I certainly will
not do and rather say with Abaelard:
"Si omnes
patres sic, ego non sic", and if no man in the whole world would adhere
and the author himself would sacrifice the principles, my opinion would remain
quite unchanged.
The author
himself???? It is one of my greatest sorrows, for a very long time, to read the
first 5 lines in the August issue of "The Individualist".
These 5 lines are
in good harmony with the lines on page 28: "If US finds nothing etc."
But they are in the strongest contradiction to "Free Banking".
5 % to 7 % of the
insured workers unemployed. That are - - I estimate - - more than a million of
people. If their unemployment would really
produce for England's economy more advantages than disadvantages, then the
existing legislation prohibiting Free Banking is a good legislation, for
it prevents the million to be employed, and if the legislation would be
repealed and the workers informed, then they would be able and would certainly
use
their newly won liberty to relieve themselves from
unemployment. What do you prefer now? Unemployment for the million or
Free Banking that frees them from unemployment?
C'est à prendre ou
à laisser!
From the passages
quoted under the heading "employment", in "Free Banking",
page 429, everybody, who did not yet know it, may learn that (involuntary! -
J.Z.) unemployment is an evil. And now I must read that you restrain
that view very considerably by stating that at least in our time and under the
present circumstances the unemployment of about a million in - - on the
whole - - no evil.
This matter is very
serious.
-----------------
There is a very
effective check to extravagant wages: The impossibility for employers to pay
them.
There exists also a
very effective means to explain to the workers the impossibility to pay
extravagant wages:
The employers could
offer the workers to hand over to them the shops, so that they may continue to
work there, organised as a cooperative.
He employer may reserve for himself the job as a manager for a number of years.
Vis-à - vis the social revolution, which is already beginning in England, it
will be their best place.
(J.Z.: I do not consider it just to hand over all remaining
capital assets to the employees free of charge and claims, although I know that
a number of employees have done this. I do hold, and in one of his earlier free
banking books and later, in discussions and letters, B. did also propose this
transformation in a free market & capitalistic, competitive and profitable
way: It would be possible, just and advantageous to all involved, to sell the
enterprise to its employees, on terms, with the whole negotiated amount payable
right away, but not in cash but in industrial bonds issued by the coop or
partnership of the former employees. These bonds are to be interest-bearing, to
have a gold clause and to be gradually amortised, largely by being paid off
with claims or clearing certificates against this coop or partnership. Then the
supposed "burden" of the acquisition of the enterprise would, in most
cases, amount only to a fraction of the additional earnings which the
cooperators or partners could obtain in this way. The former exclusive owner,
if also a capable manager, might be retained for his life-time, by his
employment contract, as a manager, being renewed again and again. His
management troubles would thus become very greatly reduced, largely to the
technical and commercial factors to the extent that these require top level
management, with the burden of managing subordinated and dependent people
largely disappearing, as in all sound self-management schemes. Many enterprises
change hands every day. But, alas, the employees only rarely appear thus
organized and financial as buyers and self-managers for them, although they
could and should. Most enterprises are not bought or taken over by cash deals.
If only they had done so - 150 - 200 years ago! How different would history
have run then? - J.Z., 28.1.03. Cooperators might even retain him as a
"president", for publicity purposes, if is his not a good manager,
leaving whatever management is still required, in the hands of their executive
or directors. With speeches and interviews this president, with his good name
and reputation, however undeserved, might then still earn his keep, although,
otherwise, his contribution to the productivity and the sales of the enterprise
might be zero. However, I doubt very much that the top men would be getting the
kinds of salaries and golden handshakes and pensions they now allocate to
themselves at the expense of the firms, that is, its employees and shareholders
and customers. - That often represents
as much of a racket, perhaps sometimes even a greater one, than that of the
self-allocated salaries, fringe benefits and pensions which the politicians
allocate themselves at public expense when they get into the saddle. Not that
this would be the worst damage that they do. - J.Z., 23.4.03.)
The workers
organized into a cooperative cannot enter in a strike. If they want to increase
their income, they must either better their production or increase the prices
of their products. The former will, probably,
always be possible. The latter they may try one time
and from this they will get a lesson which they never will forget and that by
their own (and freely chosen - J.Z.) experience
Some years before
1933 I said to some owners of large agricultural estates, to whom I had an
opportunity to talk: "Make
cooperatives out of your estates and become their president. The Russian
Revolution will claim us in a few years, in some form, be it by the Nazis or by
the Communists; but, probably, the cooperatives will then be secure. Of course,
they believed me crazy. And now? You know the "land reform" in
Germany, fostered by the Allies.
That "land
reform" will one day - - not very far away - - turn against the owners of
factories and great estates in England. The English soldiers win here the
impression, that expropriation is not only economically possible but also
morally unobjectionable, for - - they say - - if it would not be, the English
government would not have demand it (for Germany - J.Z.).
-----------------
Very
faithfully Yours, signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, ….
13.8.1949. Your letter of 11. 8.
49, received today.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
Malthusianism.
Not to be proven but to be assumed is:
There is a natural tendency in population to grow to its optimum.
There is also a natural tendency of the population to remain
stationary when the optimum is attained.
"Optimum" is a notion not to be quite
distinctly fixed and it is variable, too.
Therefore, generally, the population becomes already
stationary before the optimum, as estimated by optimists, is attained.
The study of history may lead to these doctrines and give
them some probability.
There exists also a
"revolutionary" theory of population, with which I sympathise and
which at leapt is not in contradiction to science. That theory says:
Not the tendency of
self-preservation in individuals is the original fact which impartial
observation presents, but self-preservation of species. The tendency in
individuals to preserve themselves is merely a special case of
self-preservation of species. The force, by which species exist,
produces individuals for the sole purpose to secure the existence of species.
If the fate or the existence of species is severely menaced, then the genius of
species produces individuals gifted with qualities to conquer the circumstances
which menaced the existence of the species. Example: The often admired faculty
of birds, buffaloes, etc. to be the sentinel of a group, was, probably, not
originally in the nature of the animals. But when the existence of the species
was menaced, nature called into life animals with a "sentinel-mentality,'
by selection, by mutation, by other ways we do not yet know.
In man the same. At
a certain degree, when animal faculties (strength, courage, cunning, mobility
and 1,000 others) are no more sufficient, then nature lets arise men with new
faculties: organising, tyrannising (? temporarily and rationally dominating? -
J.Z.) where it must be, sacrificing themselves, amusing others, love of science
and arts and, at last, social faculties, such as conceive Free Banking ideas
and communicating them to others.
Here nature follows
its usual way: It scatters very many seeds so that one individual may
live. Hundreds of utopists must be borne before one reformer-scientist can
operate. Many anarchists (the word taken in its popular sense) must do a
revolutionist work before one scientific anarchist teaches his fellows not to
conquer tyrants but create a state of maximum liberty. (To kill fellows like
Hitler is not superfluous. A community which does not possess tyrant-killers
[executioners! - J.Z.] is lost.)
And now it is the
genius of the human species itself, which creates a new kind of individuals:
Scientists - - not lacking courage - - who show mankind how to attain its
optimum in number.
For the first time
I found these ideas (in another form) in Tolstoy, who asserts that
humanity produces reformers just like ants produce "soldier-ants",
which remove every obstacle to the ant-community.
The great
reformer, who not only conceives the needed Ideas of social reform, but finds
also the suitable words to convince his fellowmen to act in the right way, must
still be born. But so that he may be born, he must have a chance. The chance is
a priori greater in a mankind of 6,000 millions of people than in a population
of 2 1/4 milliards. And that is one of the reasons to bring the
population of the earth to its optimum.
(J.Z.: For my taste, he does personify "nature"
here all too much, just like religious people, e.g. Tolstoy, personified their
"god" and read good intentions into him. But at least he indicates
natural development trends that go in the indicated direction. Alas, like
individual survival instincts, they are not preparing us for many of the
present technological and scientific risks. They do not let us feel e.g.,
x-rays from TV sets or computers or radiation from nuclear reactors or their
garbage, perhaps until it is too late. Or thousands of cancer-causing agents.
Nor am I prepared to wait for a new kind of "saviour". Perhaps many
great innovators are already born but, under territorialism, like under an
avalanche or a flood, or under a fresh lava flow, they cannot freely develop
but, rather, perish. Moreover, not only the creative potential of a few ought
to be fully released but that of everyone, no matter how small it may be. That
requires, among other things, e.g. individual secessionism and full
exterritorial autonomy, which, in the monetary sphere, means full monetary
freedom and, in the communications and recording, archiving and publishing
sphere, means the full utilisation of all affordable and efficient as well as
lasting alternative media. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
-----------------
Thank you for
the clipping from the Times of August 9, 1949, with Lord Boyd-Orr's speech on
food supplies by
cultivating
Africa. (A revival of ideas of colonialism and of the re-assumption of
"the white man's burden"? - J.Z.,
28.1.03.)
Interesting and just! The Lord says and is right:
"Unfortunately, like all other branches of biological science, which
sought to enrich the world in the equal interest of the people in all
countries, it was starved for funds".
Let the funds be lent on a gold basis
("Goldwertklausel" - gold clause) and the veterinary stations will
get, in a few months, more money offered to them than they are able to use.
(But really - - you are a noble mind - - such a thing as
supplying an adversary with arguments did not happen since the year when
Malthus first published his book. If there exists a karma of the Indian
kind, you will have the pleasure
to be re-incarnated as the Robespierre of the year 2000-revolution, whose duty
it shall be to sent the small remnant of the then still living Malthusians to
the Guillotine - - Euthanasia.)
----------------
If the number of hours that a man works in
agriculture, is the same, in the past and present, then an increase in the
agricultural out-put per hour means also an increase per man.
---------------
But you are right: If a man owns only so little land,
that he can cultivate it all in a week, he will not produce as much as a man
with more land.
(J.Z.: For the rest of the time, he might produce
agricultural machinery for others, thus increasing their productivity. Many
city people do that all the time, on top of a little gardening at home. - J.Z.,
28.1.03.)
In Germany the
number of men, who own quite small pieces of land, not sufficient to occupy
their full labour-time, are numerous. They work as "hands" at the
estates of men possessing more than they can cultivate on their own.
That state is not ideal. In Germany, for decades, the owners of great
agricultural estates complain about the small supply of labour and favour the
Polish agricultural labourers, who work in July and August for some weeks in
Germany. (That was before the war.)
----------------
It the money value
of the output per worker in agriculture is only 1/5th of that in
industry, then the old complaint of agriculture would be justified, namely,
that prices of agricultural products are too low.
(J.Z.: Which is not exactly an indication of food shortage
and of there being too many mouths, and buyers, either. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
Restriction of
wheat planting in USA.
At least we agree
here that the USA could supply many more people with food if these people were
able to buy the food. That is the
Malthusian side. The commercial side is:
Take a country A able and willing to supply
the 10 millions of inhabitants of its neighbour B - - a people living from
industry and suppose that country B in able and willing to supply A with all
industrial products it wants and likes, and then entrust the commerce of
the two countries to a bureaucracy as it exists now in England, America and in
the whole world. What will be the effect? Country B is unable to sell more than
trifling quantities to A. It seems, in consequence, terribly overpopulated.
Country A, on the other hand, suffers a terrible agrarian crisis. The
government restricts the arable land and many people use wheat etc. as fuel or
give it the pigs.
There is only one
remedy: A great cudgel and chasing the bureaucracy.
The price of labour
in the USA and in England and the relation of the two prices has nothing to do
with the possibility to transport these victuals which the British are willing
and able to pay for, to England. If the price is high enough, it enables the
merchants to buy in England such things as cost - - counted in gold - - more
than they cost in the USA and, nevertheless, sell them in the USA cheaper - -
counted in gold - - than American stores can
sell them. The transaction is - - commercially seen - - no
great advantage for England, but it is a greater advantage (much greater) than the present
state.
A year after abolishing the bureaucracy's guardianship,
England's industry is so efficient that at least 1,000 kinds of goods are,
counted in gold, much cheaper in England than in the USA and, nevertheless, the
wages are at least as high as in the USA. Technology has, for centuries, been
England's Ally and it will be again, tomorrow, if the great
cudgel is applied. (At the time of Napoleon I it was
estimated that England's machines did the work of 700, 000 men, which in other
countries had to be furnished by an additional population of at least 14
millions of inhabitants. So England's inhabitants and her machines gave a
man-power equal to that of France, at that time about 26 or 27 millions of
inhabitants.)
(J.Z.: I assume that B. did here bungle the translation into
English of what he had here in mind in German. If the machines merely did the
work of 700,000, then they added, in machine power, only 700,000 man-powers,
not 14 million. But if already then 700,000 English workers were provided with
as productive machines, that their output was increased 20 times, then it would
have taken other countries 14 million of as strong men and able men, but
working without machines, to produce as much. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
Instead of
recommending austerity, economists should recommend the contrary: England
should abolish all custom duties and let Americans and other people export to
England whatever they like, untaxed, the most unnecessary things not excluded.
Be sure that Englishmen will import it and let it be their
responsibility get return freight. They will get it, if they are not
mothered (or smothered - J.Z) by the
bureaucracy. (And if not, then they miscalculated. Why must the English
rack the Americans' brains???? (I don't get his meaning here. Many of B.'s
letters to M. were insufficiently proof-read by B. - J.Z., 28.1.03.)
Free the exchange
(by the cudgel!)
------------------
"Where
previously we exchanged X goods against X goods, we can, after the fall, get
only X-Y goods." Certainly!
Then - - in a few weeks or days - - prices rose in England and fell in USA, as Gossen
explained better than I can explain it here. Then the change of prices has its
natural effect and the former state will really be restored, as may be seen at
every page of history.
J.Z.: Without M.'s part of the discussion quickly on hand,
and in this formulation, B. is here not clear to me, either. As I see it, over
the mediator of a freely fluctuating exchange rate, the price levels of two
countries will tend to balance, not for all goods, but in the average, still
leaving all exporters and importers numerous chances with particular goods. A
fall in the dollar value of the pound would restrain purchases from America
while encouraging American purchases from England. A rise of the pound value,
expressed in dollars, would encourage English imports from America while
restraining American purchases from England. Whichever free exchange rate
develops will about equalise advantages of trading for both countries and
maximise as well as balance goods trade and payments between them. Since they
are not the only trading partners, the balancing will occur often indirectly,
in several steps involving trading of both with other countries. - J.Z.,
28.1.03.)
--------------------
Gold standard.
If England created such laws, which made the degrees of
prosperity a function of the supply with gold, then that is not a natural state
of things. Gold coins should be like nails and hobbies. It would be unwise and
tyrannical to prohibit them and to hinder debtors trying to pay their debts
with gold coins, as long as creditors are willing to accept them. On the other
side - - and there lies the rub - - it is unwise and tyrannical to
compel debtors to pay with gold coins, if creditors are served as well by
clearing and other means of payment.
Gold, in impossible
legal claim, but (sometimes
difficult to impossible to fulfil - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
Gold is a good legal tender.
(If one has sufficient for this purpose. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
All, what is said
against gold as a standard (means of payment - J.Z., 29.1.03.) was
really meant against gold as a legal claim. (By creditors against debtors. -
J.Z., 29.1.03.) (Read Tolstoy's book: "The Slavery of our Time", in
which he proposes to abolish money and replace it by a Christian conviction.
Tolstoy was never aware that he spoke always against gold as a legal claim.)
(By creditors against debtors. - J.Z., 29.1.03.) Economists still do not
perceive it as that. Tant pis pour eux!
In Persia
and other oriental countries it is a very old commercial law that debtors must
pay gold coins only if this is expressly agreed upon. If nothing is agreed
concerning the means of payment, then always local currency is the means of
payment, to the value of as many gold coins as was agreed upon or could
be taken as agreed in honest commercial business. I learnt from a book on
oriental commercial law that also in cases where gold coins were expressly
agreed, the creditors, in practice, took every means of payment, clearing by no
means excluded, that was not unusual.
The above stated
ideas are - - as you see - - not a mere fancy but were practised by the
commercially best trained people in the whole world. (You know the old oriental
saying:
Three Turks are wanted
to cheat a Jew, three Jews to chest a Greek, three Greeks to cheat an Armenian,
and 7 Armenians to cheat
a Persian, and finally the Persian will have cheated the 7 Armenians.)
(The contradiction to this story is here, that the Persians
appear as the most dishonest ones, while the principle and practice described
is an honest and practical one. - All analogies do limp, at least somewhat. -
J.Z., 29.1.03.)
The here stated idea means simply introduce (more - J.Z.)
honesty (and practicality - J.Z.) into business. No debtor can honestly promise
that there will always be enough gold in circulation to satisfy the creditor,
but if the debtor has gold, then it would not be honesty for the
creditor to decline to accept it.
W. B. Greene arrived
at the here explained doctrine in a quite a different way. (Tucker,
"Instead of a Book", page
232.)
"Substitute
verity in the place of fiction", that was his opinion and his great
discovery was: It's not merely a moral doctrine but an economic and
social one as well.
Some people say:
Gold should never be a standard of value because it, obviously, cannot be an
honest standard of currency. (By such expressions they meant the legal claim
of creditors to that currency). Experience in Germany, during the (Great -
J.Z.) Inflation, showed that gold may very well be a standard of value and that
prices on the goods of stores may well be expressed in gold, while no gold
circulates. Really, there were only a few kilograms at Berlin and at Pforzheim
(the seat of the gold-industry), which were daily bought and sold, but it was
sufficient to
fix an exchange rate of paper money for gold. The price was
published and this published price served as multiplier In the stores. This
system was already widely used in 1922.
---------------------
You say: "…
paper will not be acceptable abroad unless the foreigner can get the right
goods at the right price there." (Rather, the right price for his goods. -
Or, for the paper that he accepts, an exchange rate that permits him to buy the
right goods there, at the right price, for his exports. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
The thing is
theoretically not so simple and in practice much more simple.
The foreigner
normally deposits the notes with a bank. Then he gets a quittance or
certificate for the deposited notes. This certificate he sells the next day,
maybe, even on the same day. An experience of more then 300 years shows that in
London there were always buyers for bills exchange and similar documents.
The importer does not care for the right goods and their
price. That's a matter for the man who buys the notes. Experience taught
that a difference of 1 % in value made dozens or hundreds of goods exportable
which, before that difference arose, could not be exported.
----------------------
Devaluation. I think that we agree here completely.
Devaluation is, in my opinion a violation of the personal rights of the owners
of notes and of all creditors and is merely a legalised theft. (The cudgel, the
cudgel!! Landsburgh, an author who published for many years the much
esteemed monthly "Die Bank", proposed an amendment to the
constitution of every country, insisting that a minister who devalues or
inflates, or debates the currency in other ways, should at once be hanged. He
demanded that the gallows should be depicted on every bank note, together with
that article of the constitution. The new standard of currency should - - so
proposed Landburgh - - be called "Galgenwährung". (Gallows Currency -
J.Z.)
-----------------------
Rückstrom. Interest of bankers! Intelligence of
bankers!! Insight of bankers!!!! I learnt that in inflation times and learn
about it every day by the banking conditions of Germany new in full vigour. It
is my sincere opinion, that average bankers are the most stupefied part of the
people, still more stupefied than average ministers. Business and stability of
credit conditions must become quite independent of the intelligence of bankers.
The Rückstrom-Principle guarantees that independence and stability.
---------------------
Vansittard. If he speaks of "The Germans" that has no more
value than has the average German's talk about "The English".
I see well, that
people like Vansittard do have the power in England, and that men with
political experience (to which - - I think - - Vansittard does not belong) are
of no influence, as happens now in the whole world.
But this power depends upon a circumstance not no so
unchangeable as V. believes: It may be that the successor of
Stalin treats the Germans better than they are treated now
by the Russians (Soviets! - J.Z.) and demands only a collaboration with Russia.
An empire from the Rhine to Vladiwostok led industrially and, perhaps,
commercially by the Germans (Commerce does not need leadership, far less
commercial leadership - J.Z., 29.1.03.), aided by Asia (Who is to be the actor
there? - J.Z.), which in less then 10 years will be under the influence of the
Russians, and an empire in which, perhaps, Free Banking is permitted, would
in the next war occupy the little England - - militarily well prepared (for
this -J.Z.) by Malthus - - within a few days, and the next generation may thank
Malthus and Vansittard if it is for the next decades a "protectorate"
of the Kremlin. Friends of England, as I am, are now silenced by the
dismantling policy.
(The "Demontagen" the taking apart and removal of
whole industrial enterprises. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
Allies intimidated - - - in "Faust", Goethe lets
his Mephistopheles say:
"Den Teufel spuert
das Voelkchen nie, (The people never
perceive the devil,
"Und wenn er sie
beim Kragen haette!" even if it has
them by the throat! - J.Z.)
He speaks of intimidation. I will believe, that he in not
intimidated, but here are other points of view than such a primitive feeling as intimidation.
I thank you very
much for the clipping.
(May the English
and the Americans place an army of more then a million men in Germany, that
would be a contribution to security. But the dismantling policy is a bad
thing.) (It was also a stupid thing. The Allies got thus outdated equipment an
then, with the aid of the Marshall Plan and on credit, they got the most modern
equipment in the world, far superior to the dismantled machines. - J.Z.,
29.1.03.)
-----------------
Which industry is
today no war industry??? Even agriculture is a war industry.
----------------
Beatrice Webb. Very interesting. I would never have believed
that such an author as B. W. can be dry.
----------------
King Hall. He does not
see, that if all that he wants done is actually performed while Free
Banking is not permitted or in use, then "England is still a well equipped
ship without the screw which moves the ship. Then even the best
machinery in useless. Nevertheless, King Hall sees many things that remain
unnoticed by others.
---------------
Education.
"… This contradicts the entire philosophy of freedom. …" - There are
several philosophies of freedom. I adhere to Seneca's philosophy, and S.
was the first author (known) to have written against slavery. But I think that he was a follower of Roman
Lawyers, who taught: Freedom is for adult, not for minor men. They should have
as much freedom as possible and not more.
(J.Z.: We still believe this regarding e.g. children and
are, I believe, right in doing so. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
But I agree with 90
% of what you say, and your personal experience (most interesting for me)
corresponds to mine. Learning is now made interesting for children. There you
are right, and that is - - in general - - the true reason why children now
like it more to go to school than we did.
But there you are
also right as well: Children of today learn surprisingly less than we did. All
old teachers say the same. If such a
fact is observed in England as well as here, I am inclined to ascribe it to a
change in the human constitution for about 40 years. The increasing physical
size of the youth indicates that such a change in their constitution took place. If I
would be a dictator, I would now let the school age begin at 8 years and let it
cease at 17 or 18. Then - - I think - - boys and girls would be as educated as
we were. Men live longer today, develop within a longer period than we did and,
if treated according to their changed nature, would, perhaps learn more and
with greater pleasure than we did.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(J.Z.: I do very much doubt that not only length, weight and
development ages of children have changed [have you seen quite convincing
figures on this?] but their mentality and learning ability as well, apart from
the statism and popular myths they are indoctrinated with in school, by teachers
likewise indoctrinated. What we may see there may largely be the result of the
ever-increasing bureaucratisation of the education system, and the unionisation
of its teachers, of the certification system for "teachers", of
generations of compulsory attendance and of prolonged subsidisation of the
whole system, at the expense of taxpayers. Has any other expensive and
extensive governmental bureaucracy become more efficient over the decades? I do
not know of any. On the contrary: In all of them costs and manpower go up - and
services decline or become even negative values. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …. 14.8.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
if a people, or a large group among the people, is convinced
that it is suppressed or exploited by another group, then the latter is in
danger. It is not important whether the first group is really suppressed
or exploited. Important is only the conviction. Example: India. The masses were
convinced that "the English" (no distinction was made) suppressed and
exploited the Indians. It would have been easy to explain that on balance the
presence of an army commanded by Englishmen and the existence of a supreme government
by Englishmen was a great advantage. The cost of the English government was
certainly a trifling fraction of the costs of the Rajah's government 200 years
ago, the cost calculated in working hours per inhabitant. But that was all
unimportant. The people did not know it and the few who knew it did not dare to
speak up about it. The European friends of India, who said it was, were -
- of course - - suspected
of being in the pay of "the English".
Now came what, inevitably, had to come. The
"movement" found leaders, the leaders found adherents, and many
fanatics among them, and when such a weak, tyrannical and ignorant
government as the present government began to "rule", it was
removed. (Tyrannical? Yes - - although the tyranny was merely modern
prescriptionism, as in the case of India the modern monetary legislation.)
Why are tyrannical
governments always weak? Because they waste their time and their power
on enforcing trifles and pedantries, which their ignorance takes to be
important to uphold their power. To express it more correctly: For the
government the upholding of such things as religion, monetary monopoly, racial
privileges and class privileges are unimportant.
(J.Z.: On the contrary, they might consider only such things
to be important and thus bring about their own downfall. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
The weakness of a
government may be hidden for centuries. But suddenly such a weak government
comes into a
situation as so many Asiatic governments came, who commanded
hundred-thousands of soldiers, when they collided with European governments, or
the Inca-government came, when a few hundred Spanish thieves invaded the
country. (They mobilised the numerous dissenters and held the ruler hostage! -
J.Z., 29.1.03.)
(One must distinguish a government and a bureaucracy.
An almighty bureaucracy always makes us believe in the existence of a powerful
government. But if the government is really powerful, then the bureaucracy
obeys it, too, as other groups of subjects do.) (J.Z.: In reality, a powerful
bureaucracy mostly weakens the government as well as the people and then the
government can be easily overthrown or defeated. - J.Z., 29.1.03.) (J.Z.:
However, the phenomenon of some honest and efficient public servants
does also exist. But we should never become dependent upon their services, as
we were before upon the services of an absolute monarch and his appointees or
"born" aristocratic sub-rulers. - Free competition and free consumer
choice and sovereignty in all spheres. - PIOT, J.Z. 22.5.03.)
At present the
greatest part of the English working classes believes to be suppressed
and to be exploited by other classes. Whether they are or not is here
unimportant. As long as they believe it, they will follow and, at the deciding
moment, obey those who promise to subdue and exploit the other classes
on their part. ("Expropriation des expropriateurs.")
(J.Z.: That would really make sense towards the most
important expropriators of today, namely, the politicians and bureaucrats. See
my proposal on this in PEACE PLANS 19c, now also available free of charge by
e-mail. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
The first to submit will be the bureaucracy, simply to keep
its jobs. The government does not recognise its real situation because it is
occupied e.g. with licensing barrows (The Individualist, August 1949, page 31)
and such things.
There are now three
possibilities:
1.) The "development" continues as it had begun.
Some new Cromwell will accelerate it and become, for some time, dictator of the
country.
2.) The "development" is still more accelerated by
the landing of 1 million Russian soldiers. The weight of a soldier, his weapons
and ammunition, machine guns, etc., is about 300 kilograms. An aeroplane of 20
tons transports about 60 soldiers together with their equipment. 16, 000
aeroplanes (which Russia very probably possesses) will transport them from
1,000 places of appointment within to hours or less to England. If the number
of troop concentrations is large enough, then the preparations for an invasion
cannot be detected, not even by better spies than England does, at the moment,
support in Russia.
In the same night,
when the troops are transported, a "coup de main", will replace the
present ministry by a communist committee.
The Russians will come in the name of liberty. The new
government will promise many things, and the first will be to compel merchants
to sell food for half of he price at which they sell it now. For some days that
is possible. Public executions of "saboteurs" will enforce it (for a
week or so - - a decisive week).
For Russia that's an act like the occupation of
Czechoslovakia, of Poland, etc.
What will England do? Send a million of English soldiers to
Russia?
Militarily, that would be possible and also in 6 hours, if
the million can be gathered. But in Russia that million will soon suffer the
fate of the "grande armée"in 1812.
A few days later,
the Americans will come and bomb every English town occupied by the Russians.
Perhaps they will really kill the whole invasion army.
Etc.
And, at last, the
Russians will erect in the Hyde Park a monument to honour Malthus, who
prepared this action so admirably - - a monument 100 times greater than that
for Lenin at Moscow. He deserves it.
3.) An organisation is created in consequence of which the
working classes do no more believe to be suppressed by other classes.
The most simple way would be the transformation of factories, etc. into
cooperatives. All what is said against this economic form is unimportant
compared with the political advantage. Also - - as Beatrice Webb (or
Potter - - she wrote her books before she married) explained in her book on
cooperatives - - all disadvantages can be easily removed by reforming the early
and primitive organisations.
If I lived in
England, I would propose an article:
a) the workers of
all factories where more than 100 workers are occupied, organise themselves in
a cooperative.
That is done
within an hour.
b) The cooperative
leases the factory. The former owner becomes president of the cooperative as
long as the
lease contract
is in operation. If the organisation is well prepared, that can also be the
work of one day.
c) Once the factory
is leased, the cooperative considers the possibility to buy the factory.
Example: The factory is worth L 1 million. The cooperative
hands over to the proprietor 10, 000 bonds of L 100 each. The bonds are in the
usual form of industrial bonds quoted at the exchange. Coupon-sheets of the
usual form are attached to every bond. The interest may be 4 % p.a. (or 1/3rd % monthly). In every year (or every month) a
part of the bonds is drawn by lot. The last bond may be drawn after 30 years
(or so). Then the cooperative has to pay annually L 578, 301 - After 30 years
it is the proprietor of the factory.
An essential
condition by which the bonds and the coupon-sheets differ from the usual form:
Drawn bonds and
due coupon-sheets are "paid" by the obligation of
the factory to accept them in its normal business in the same way as it would
accept legal cash money.
Monthly payment (I
even would prefer weekly payment) has a great advantage. The workers become
soon accustomed to continuously redeem a certain amount. If the redemption is
only every year, they cry: "The burden is
too great! Also the financial ability of cooperative managers must not
be over-estimated. But when the redemption is due every week, no great ability
is needed to provide these
4 % p.a. will be
(about) the amount of the rent to be paid to the proprietor. The slight
increase to 5,78391 % will enable the cooperative to become proprietor itself.
If the relations
between proprietor and cooperative are good, the proprietor will leave a part
of the redemption to the factory to improve its plant. At present and in most
factories great improvements of the plant are impossible because the workers fear to be replaced by
the machines. When the workers are themselves proprietors, they are interested
to improve the plant, either to earn more money or to shorten their working
hours.
One must also
consider that at present from all patents taken out no more than about 2% to 3
% are utilised. The rest becomes useless as a result of the economic (rather, anti-economic!
- J.Z.) obstacles against using them.
The resistance of the workers is one if the obstacles
and an important one. (In England much more so than e.g. in Germany.)
Many observers reported that England's plant is, in the
average, backward, compared with that of Germany, Belgium or Holland, not to
speak of America. That relates to the time before the war.
A very great
advantage for all parties and the country will be the economic
impossibility of strikes under such a system.
The next advantage
is: The interests of the workers change completely. They acquire now real
economic interests. 100's of things, today quite outside their sphere (J.Z.:
Unless they have a very good suggestion-box and bonus scheme! - J.Z., 29.1.03),
become very interesting. The price of the factory's product, the taxes,
the price of raw materials, customs and the real optimum of daily labour time,
are now really studied. The appeals of Communists become ridiculous. Communists
know that very well and are the most exasperated foes of "cooperative
socialism".
It will be observed
that much more than 50% of the workers prefer the wage system to the
cooperative system, simply because they feel themselves not able to do more
than their daily labour. But the possibility will also be there for
these workers to organise themselves into a cooperative. It will exercise a
good economic influence.
On the whole: Their
belief to be subdued and exploited will be diminished, so that it exerts no
longer a political danger.
Many 100's of
arguments - - and very good ones - - may be urged against the system but, if
the proprietors should decline it, then they might tomorrow be deprived of
their factories without compensation. That may be their argument for
the system.
The conviction, not
to be exploited by the new system, is well founded. The payment for rents and interest, payable
for the next 25 or even 30 years, may seem a kind of exploitation. But even the
average worker will comprehend, that a civil war would cost more.
Concerning the
technical side, it will be necessary to subdivide the co-operative into smaller
cooperatives - - say of a dozen or so
members - - which farm from the great cooperative a part of the factory. System
Bata. The system has been introduced, for about 100 years, in French mines. Zola,
in his "Germinal" describes it. (In the first world war I often
visited the mine where the events, described in "Germinal" took
place.)
---------------------
In Germany no
journal will accept an article on a subject as I do here submit to your
criticism. No meeting discussing the subject is possible. The people who write
in daily papers, journalists, etc., are government officials or professors or
professional writers. It's impossible to break this "ring".
---------------------
Perhaps it is not without interest to consider the military
side of the now given problem. There is only one means, if one will
tackle the problem seriously. That means is the rearmament of Germany in
a form, which does not endanger the military strength of the West. This could
be achieved in the following way:
a.) Dividing
Germany into more independent countries than now exist. The average size of an
American State
should be the
size of a German State.
b.) Leaving
monetary, economic and military independence to every State. The possibility
for every State to
conclude
military treaties with England. (System of before 1806.)
c.) The treaties
under b) should provide for the possibility that German soldiers can do their
service in England.
The number of
German soldiers in England should be equal to that of English soldiers in
Germany. (The
relations
between English soldiers and the German population are very good.)
d.) Ending every kind of dismantling (of
factories. - J.Z.).
e.) Repealing every
law which defames Germans.
f.) Subdividing
every German State into cantons as in Switzerland.
g.) Permission for
every canton to organise a militia.
h.) Recall some
die-hards by a plebiscite, at first Vansittard, if he still has any public
service job at the time of the
plebiscite.
---------------------
Utopian? Of course!
There are many people in Germany, who prefer the Russian government to the here
sketched kind of liberty. And there are many people in England,
Vansittard and many others, who also prefer a Russian government in Germany to
the ending of dismantling and such things. But, as old Schiller said:
"Die
Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgerichte" (World history is the world's court.
- J.Z.)
and for people like me the German proverb applied will be:
"Mitgefangen,
mitgehangen!" (Caught together, hung together. - J.Z.)
Very
faithfully Yours, signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
15.8.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
National News-Letter,
issue of 2.6.1949, page 7, quoted the Economist of 14th of May 1949.
Some details of much increased wheat production are given for Kansas, Oklahoma
and Texas, States where soil erosion etc. menaced the production, as
Malthusians feared. But
204 million bushels were
produced in the average of 1924/26,
349 " " " " " "
" " 1944/46,
per annum.
The Economist
quotes Sir John Russell who estimates that at present only 1/3rd
of the world's land-surface suitable for food production is at present so used.
Some days ago the
Berlin daily "Telegraf", published an article pro Malthus. The
"Telegraf" was impartial enough to publish some days later another
article with figures like: The maximum of the world's population may be 10, 000 million men. The production of food
could be 25 times greater than it is, as far as technology is concerned. The
latter figures were from a Russian economist.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
Telepathy through space was undoubtedly observed.
But how far goes telepathy? Also from star to star?
Can telepathy go
through time as it goes through space? Some mystics think: it can. They
refer to the fact that a little time-difference is nearly always
observed. The question is only how long can the time difference be? Can it
bridge centuries? multiples of centuries? "Kalpas"? Some Indian Sects
thinks it can!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
The above mentioned
issue of National News-Letter, reproduces at page 7 a speech of Mr. Bailey,
President of the Scientific Instrument Manufacturer's Association.
"The rates of pay of
scientific-instrument makers in Western Germany have been estimated at 1 s. 10
d. an hour. This is certainly, at the
moment, one third less than British rates and thus accounts for the fact that
German precision instruments are selling for one-third less in the world's
markets."
"The policy of allowing this unfair
competition, coupled with the purchase tax, has, I fear, already sounded the
death knell of the promising camera industry in this country."
Stephen King-Hall adds:
"Another way of
looking at it that Britain's prices are higher because her workers' living
standards are higher than those of other European workers, who work just as
hard. DO Germans and others regard our living standards as unfair?"
I think, I understand a little economic statistics, but to
estimate the difference in pay of German workers and English ones, expressed in
shillings and pence, would be a task that I would not attempt now.
Further: I really doubt whether now, after repealing
the "planned economy laws", the standard of German scientific
instrument makers is not higher than that of English workers. May it be
or not: Nobody in Germany or elsewhere covets the English a standard of living
as high as it can be. The others will not have more to eat if the English have
less.
Moreover: Mr. Bailey does not estimate the share of wages in
the price of the product. That is obviously necessary in such comparisons.
Concerning purchase taxes (sales taxes - J.Z.), they exist
also in Germany, perhaps in all European countries.
Germans work with
very bad machines. Their product will not be the beet. The best instruments are
now produced in the USA, where wages are higher than in Germany or in England.
And, nevertheless, American instruments are cheap, as I read some months ago in
a German economics paper.
------------------
Yours
faithfully, signed: Ulrich von Beckerath.
(J.Z.: What counts are not the absolute labour costs for
such comparisons but the part of labour costs per unit produced. Under high
productivity for labour (well trained and equipped with machines and not held
back by union rules etc.), the wages may be higher than in other countries and
still the labour costs per unit as well as the sales price per unit produced
may be lower. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
(Note from B. to M
regarding agricultural yields, following the previous discussion on this. -
J.Z.)
(16.8.49.)
In the range from about 22 DZ (Doppelzentner) to about 30
DZ the increase in yield would be
absorbed by the increase in production cost, but not surpassed. The peasants
are not interested in increasing the yield, if their gain is not increased, to.
On the other hand, it would be possible that an increased yield reduces the
prices or the speed of selling.
My impression is,
that humanity has now attained a state, where the interest of peasants, not to
increase their yield too much, collides with the consumers' interest to
increase the yield. There are two remedies:
1.) replacing the present habit to produce only for the
market of the current year and the next by the habit to conclude long-term
agreements, 10 years and more, by which the consumers (great cooperatives,
administrations, etc.) bind themselves to pay a fixed price (counted in gold
units) for the time of the agreement, and to buy the whole crop.
(J.Z.: The whole crop? That could lead to over-supply, like
many governmental agricultural subsidies do. The quantity so purchased, should
rather be set at a maximum limit, corresponding to estimated consumer want
demand at these prices. Thus farmers would tend to produce as much, but no more,
in the average. I also believe that 10 years would be too long a contract
period. Two to five years would probably mostly suffice, with contracts for the
future to be renegotiated at least a year before they run out. There should
also be a clause to cover the impossibility to fulfil such a delivery contract
on these terms because of floods, draught, storms, frost, pests etc. - J.Z.,
29.1.03.)
2.) If that does not prove sufficient: To replace the
present system of agriculturists that produce at their own risk by a system,
where the consumers are proprietors of the soils and the agricultural labourers
are employed under conditions as now in many gas works. The wage increases to
the same extent that the produced gas increases (per employee! - J.Z.) and, moreover,
the workers participate in the amounts of expenses saved and measured by a
normal standard.
If the working expenses per cubic foot are normally X and by
care and effort of the workers they are, in a given month, only 1/2 X, then the
saved 1/2 X is divided, so that - - say - - 3/4 of the savings go to the
workers and 1/4 to the gas works.
Example: In a given quantity of gas that part of production
costs, which by care etc. of the workers may be reduced is 1 Pound. The workers
reduce it to 10 s. Then 7 1/2 s. are distributed among the workers and 2 1/2 s.
is taken by the gas work.
That system is
essentially different from participating in the profit. "Profit
sharing" is of little effect.
(J.Z.: It does become effective when earnings from profit
sharing come to pass by at least a minimum percentage of total earnings, say,
20 to 30 %. Then workers become really interested in cost savings and
improvements, provided their jobs remain secure. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
The best system
ever invented to combine all advantages of employment with the advantages of
independent labour has been that of Bata, the great shoe-manufacturer. I
think it is known in England no less than in Germany or in Bohemia, where it
originated. The progress by Bata is greater than the progress by Taylor.
(J.Z.: The system is known under many names: Gang work, work
cooperatives, autonomous group work, organisation development etc. and a large
literature exists on it but I have not yet seen a book that describes all its
varieties and compares them with each other. Alas, all these innovators have
not yet sufficient dealt with the sales problem for their increased output,
utilising monetary freedom methods. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
In Burma
certainly one of the most fertile countries, there were rice producing areas,
in 1,000 hectares, in:
1936/37.
1937/38. 1938/39. 1939/40. 1940/41.
4900 5073 5073 4860 5023
The yield was, in 1,000 Doppelzentners
72 024 69 960 81 869 71 060 81 980.
Consequently the yield per hectare was:
14,7 13.8 16.0 14.6 16.3
(Wagemann, Suedostasien.)
That is very much less than it could be. Here are still
great reserves to be unlocked by more capital.
From a statistics
of Japan I remember that the yield per Hectare was about the same as in Burma.
I hope to get more information.
The most surprising
figures were (for me) those of Java.
The population was in 1927 = 737 per square mile, and the
trouble was, nevertheless, to find markets for the food produced.
Bth.
16.8.49.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 17.8.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
in "Free Banking", page 368, you write: "…
proposals to confiscate private industry are here ignored as
impracticable."
That was quite
right at the time when you wrote it. And now???
The social revolution in England is going on, fast. The most
remarkable is the mentality, which made the social revolution possible,
has now replaced the old English mentality, whose basis was economic
independence. 40 years ago, those English workers, who meditated about things
beyond their household (a little more than in other countries, not very
much) and who thought that the capitalistic system was not good enough for
them, would replace it by a system of cooperatives. That was far from
abolishing private property in industry. The true reason for which the
mentality of the workers (and not only of the workers) changed, was that the
"leading" class failed in every respect. This class, still now
considered as "exploiters" by the workers, proved to be unable even
to exploit. Such a class - - to speak the truth - - neither excites respect nor
deserves it. The exploiters appealed to the government no less than the workers
themselves do. It would be contrary to all historical experience if such an
incapable class would not be replaced by another, one that at least understands
the art of exploiting. In Russia the replacement is now finished. The new
bourgeoisie works in a very primitive manner: immediately by State power, as
the Hyksos and the Normans did, but they work, and protect the workers from
unemployment. The workers in the Eastern world now build ammunition factories,
just like the old Egyptians built pyramids; the protection against unemployment
is the same as that of the old Egyptians. The only - - but remarkable - -
difference is: The old Egyptians were so angry about their protection against
unemployment, that they swore (look at Herodot) never to pronounce the names of
Cheops and Chefren, the main builders of the pyramids. They would deliver them
to oblivion, in spite of their pyramids. But a Greek historian (Herodot
mentions his name - - I forgot it) preserved the names of Cheops and Chefren.
Modern slaves are quite far from such a mentality. They will be protected
against unemployment and in a manner easily to be conceived. About all
other things they do not care.
--------------------
Zander may
tell you about the lady Professor Vierkandt, who visited him some weeks ago.
She is one of the most intelligent women I ever met with. She told me:
Man is a part of
nature. Acts of men are phenomena of nature. So the construction and the
use of atomic bombs
must be considered as an act of nature itself. Does reason
go far astray if it supposes that the extermination of mankind and of every
life on earth by atomic bombs is an act of nature by which it corrects the
blunder it committed by creating and developing man?
That in the same
idea which came to me. Important ideas seldom develop in one head.
--------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(J.Z.: I don't like a personified nature (and its assumed
purposes) any more than a personified God, supposedly punishing us for our
"sins". There isn't sufficient mental progress from the all powerful
and "reasonable" God notion to the all powerful and "reasonable"
Nature idea. - J.Z., 29.1.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 18.8.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
economists did not yet sufficiently distinguish (perhaps
they did not yet distinguish at all) the great difference in the working of a
free exchange market under the following conditions:
1.) the country is at a gold standard, model 1913,
2.) the country is at a gold standard insofar as the
government permits setting of prices in gold and allows that the
means of payment,
at the pleasure of the debtor, is gold coins or local currency, the latter in
such quantity as
corresponds to
its quotation at the market,
3.) the country is at a paper money standard, as now more
than 9/10th of the world is, England included.
Now let me suppose
that in England all prices double - - the prices expressed in gold units - - so
that all goods in England cost double the quantity of gold than they would cost
in the USA. If then England is at condition No. l., then all gold will flow off
to the USA, and quickly, too.
All terrors of a lack of gold will be observed: Unemployment
of many millions, etc. That state will endure until the price level of England
is diminished, at least for a great quantity of goods. The gold exported from
England will be used to pay former debts and will hardly be used to pay for new
imports. Imports will practically cease. Many creditors will lose their money.
Economists will talk of the admirable automatism of the gold standard that
restores "normal" economical conditions without government
intervention and do not perceive, that granting the creditors a legal claim to
gold is a very far-going government intervention. In every case, the rate of
exchange will remain essentially unaltered, that is: it will not differ more
than about 2 % from the rate before the crisis.
Very different is
the situation under condition No. 2.
Gold will flow off,
too, but gold will now purchase goods. Creditors are not entitled to
claim gold and will be so kind as to accept local currency, foreigners as well
as others. Nobody will become a bankrupt because of a scarcity of gold. If all
gold is exported from England, the English will offer local currency as a means
of payment. There is always any quantity of means of payment used in London as
local currency, that an importer, importing cotton or coffee, will accept. May
be, that such a quantity is great. The merchant will demand such an amount of
local currency, that he is able to buy, at London or in other places of
England, goods of any kind for which there is a market in the USA.
To represent the situation clearly: If the amount of local
currency is fourfold of what it was before, then every commodity of England is
fit to be exported. The merchants are then able to buy the commodity in England
and sell it at New York cheaper than American commodities of the same kind are
sold there. The supposition is, that the English consent to pay the high prices
for imported goods.
How far the readiness goes to pay very high prices was
observed during the "cotton- famine" from 1861 to 1865. (American
Civil War.)
If the English are not ready (to pay high import prices -
J.Z.) then imports cease correspondingly. That is inconvenient but no
catastrophe.
In practice, the merchant who imported cotton, coffee, tea
etc. to England, will sell the local currency and exchange it at the market for
that currency which he wants.
In London that is no problem. He gets USA-Dollars as easily
as Paraguay-Money to buy Maté and import the Maté to New York.
May be that at the exchange-market the quotation is reduced
to 25 % of the quotation which would be observed, if the price level in England and in the USA
would be as in 1913. But at such a quotation no less English goods can be exported than were in 1913. Free Trade
devaluates in this manner the English money exactly in the measure as English
industry wants, no more, no less.
Now it becomes an
important circumstance that the prices in England remain expressed in gold
units. The second important circumstance is, that the local currency is
expressed in gold units, too.
On the notes, certificates, etc. is printed:
"This note etc. is accepted in the
business of the bank XYZ
and its debtors so as its face value of gold would be
accepted."
But, what do the note bearers observe? At the exchange market
local currency suffers a considerable discount against gold units. That - - of
course - - causes distrust. Everybody will get rid of his local currency as
quickly as possible. He will bring it to the places where it is accepted for
its nominal values. If he is a debtor of the bank XYZ, then he will pay at once
his debts. If he is not one of its debtors, then he will bring the notes or
certificates to the bank's debtors, the shops, the artisans, etc., who all are
(so tyrannical is the bank!) obliged to accept the notes at their nominal
value. The shops etc., in their turn, at once pay their debts to the bank, so
that the notes disappear very quickly from circulation - together with their
discount.
It would be in
contradiction to the experience of centuries if production would not be
stimulated by such a quick turnover. But increased production means always a
decrease in prices. The main element of price, that is the costs of selling - -
advertising, commissions for agents, rent for storing the commodities,
increased insurance, etc. - - normally about 40 % - 50 % of the price - - can
be reduced without reducing the wages or the gain of the employers.
Plant improvements, impossible before, are introduced.
"Shop-Rules" of the Unions, observed in times of unemployment, are no
longer observed. Etc. Thus, after some time - - certainly in less than 6
months, the difference between England and the USA is not greater than it was
in 1913.
Distrust in a
monetarily well organised community is no less important than trust.
The economical
condition No. 3 is often investigated by modern economists.
The author of
"Free Banking" observed well, that if gold coins are simply replaced
by fiat money, the economic conditions of the country are not improved, but
made worse. The worst is: The monopoly bank becomes the master of the country
and prescribes all economic conditions. If the managers of the bank are average
men, they impoverish the country as now England is impoverished in the midst of
a plenty of best trained workers, raw materials offered from all sides et
lowest prices, of the very best plants, etc. The intention of the
impoverishers are, nevertheless, the best. But they can do no good, for a
similar reason as even the best trained bear will do no good - in a china
store.
----------------------
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
19.8.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
three years ago, you invited Mr. Ness Edwards (Parl. Sec.
Min. of Labour) to discuss with the P.R.A. (Personal Rights Association - J.Z.)
(tel. Wimbledon 0950 ) the doctrine, believed, by many workers: ..0
"It is the
inalienable right on the part of workers in industry to decide who they will
work with." (Individualist, Dec. 1946, page 43.)
Mr. Edwards did not
phone yet. Obviously, he is still meditating the problem, one of the most
serious and difficult ever raised in
sociology. MY impression is that until now no group except the P.R.A. advocates
right standpoint. How carefully Mr. Edwards had studied the question before
publishing his opinion. one may see from
his distinction between industrial workers and others. The
distinction is not without foundation.
Let us consider the situation of one of the great
agricultural cooperatives in Italy, which took on lease many of the vast real estates of bankrupt proprietors
in the years after 1905. (The history of that movement is still to be written.)
This was done to the advantage of both parts. The proprietors got a secure
income, which they were not able to gain by their own activity, and the
agricultural workers improved their condition surprisingly. A great advantage
for Italy was that strikes, of course, were impossible everywhere the workers
were organized in cooperatives. But, as
the Indian proverb says: "Every little grain of rice casts its
shadow."
The proprietors inevitably were monopolists of land, and
this monopoly was inherited by the cooperative. It's an old objection of State
socialism against cooperative socialism that the latter does not remove the
monopoly of land. (State socialism does not answer the reply of cooperative
socialism that replacing private monopoly by state monopoly brings the workers
from the frying pan into the fire.)
Seriously this problem
was for the first time investigated by the Austrian economist Theodor
Hertzka, in his two works "Freiland" and "Eine Reise nach
Freiland", published in the eighties. Hertzka (one of the founders of
cooperative socialism) (Buchez proposed "open cooperatives" before
him, as B. pointed out elsewhere! - J.Z., 30.1.03.) said: The problem of the
monopoly, exercised by cooperatives in agriculture or in industry, can only be
solved in one way. There must be created an obligation for co-operatives and
all others, who exercise a monopoly, to admit every worker who wishes to work
at the monopolised place. Even if - - says Hertzka - - the time of work at the
place may have to be reduced to one hour daily, by the necessity to occupy a
great number of workers and the income of the workers correspondingly reduced,
if, under such conditions, the workers continue to work there. There must be
advantages which compensate for the impossibility to work there for longer than
an hour and for an income of only one hour daily.
Nobody will contest the logic of Hertzka's
train of thought. Further investigations must prove whether the consequence
must be driven to the degree proposed by Hertzka. E.g., it seems that in the
case of railways an exaggeration of the number of workers, whose time of work
is as much reduced, endangers the security of
railway transport. In very small cooperatives or shops, that are not
organised on a cooperative basis, the trouble to enforce the principle may be
greater than the rouble by the rest of monopoly remaining also in small operatives. But P.R.A.'s principle
is right: Nobody should exercise a monopoly, neither a single person nor a
group of persons nor the government.
One may say, that
in industry it is easy to find jobs, so that the workers in industrial groups
may be permitted to decide who they will work with; the social trouble would
then be less than the trouble caused by the presence of a worker in the group
who, in important questions, does not share the opinion of his comrades.
Possibly that was the opinion of Mr. Edwards when he spoke
of workers in industry. But I think that industry should not, in this
point, be privileged against agriculture, although it may be advisable to
except very small groups. Further, this exception should be restricted to a
predetermined period, say 15 years.
Jefferson, the great democrat, proclaimed the most
important and generally neglected principle that every generation should frame
its own legislation and that no generation has the right to bind posterity to
its laws. The period of laws, consequently, must be limited by the constitution
of the country, so that, once the period has passed, the validity of the law
ceases, unless it is expressly renewed by the legislator. Shorter periods for a
law's validity, than the constitutional one, must be permitted, of course.
In every case a
philosophical consideration of the problem leads to the realisation that Mr.
Edwards' principle is bad and even undemocratic, the word taken in good modern
sense. That the principle is also very bad in practice, and injures the real
interests of the workers, is now to be seen in Germany. Shop councils are
generally introduced and have the right or the power, and use it, to put a veto
against the engagement of workers whose mentality or political past (say former
nazis, although most of them now see to what craziness they had adhered ) does
not please them or seems to be "suspect". Socialists find
difficulties in districts where 'Christians prevail and vice
versa.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, ….
20.8.1949.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
I received several printed matters for which I thank yon
very much. Truth, Economist, "analysis" and the cutting from the Indian Journal I sent you some weeks
ago.
In
"Truth" (Aug. 5, 1949, page 160) I find under the heading
"Vigilant's" Letter- Box the communication: "Devaluation". - Expert
opinions differ; in the meantime hold the prefs. (Prefs? A typo for rates?
Short for preferences? - meaning bids for currency? - J.Z.)
There are to
"experts" concerning devaluation. Devaluation is a legal theft. It
robs the class of creditors and makes presents to the class of debtors. That's
all. Certainly: Theft can also be considered from a technical standpoint and insofar there
are experts in devaluation as there are burglars who are real experts in
burglary. (You
know the often told story of the manager of a prison. He had put the key of a
safe into the safe and then
closed it inadvertently. How to open the safe?? By an
oxygen-hydrogen blow-pipe? (blow torch? welder? - J.Z.) The manager's boy had a
better advice: "Let celebrated burglar, escorted here yesterday, open the
safe! He can do it! And really - - in a few minutes he had it opened
without damaging the safe, something experts in safes were unable to do,
the world "expert" taken in its usual sense.
There are also
people, who do not think that devaluation is a crime. I would like to compare
their mentality to that of old Greeks and Phasacians. Odyssey, 9th
song, verses 40 ff. There the noble Odysseus describes his bad luck, when he
robbed the Kikones. These indescribably barbarians defended themselves
rather effectively, so that the noble hero Odysseus could not steal much more
than a leather-bag full of wine, which the priest Maron, son of Euanthes, had
given him - - not voluntarily - - but to avoid sacking and things still more
evil. (Verse 197.) I think that the noble hero
Odysseus here told the truth (which he did not do) for I know of many
similar stories from the Russians, when they sacked Berlin. A bottle of "Schnapps" and they spared the
inhabitants - - not in every case, but generally. Poles and Czechs did not do
so. They extorted the liquor and then plundered and violated the women.
Russians, including men from the lowest classes, are, in general, much more
cultivated than Poles and Czechs. (In general; I know exceptions.)
(J.Z.: Some Berliners had left their wine & liquor cellars
full and thus produced Red Army drunks, who raped and looted more than usual.
As for Poles: Our neighbours on our ground-floor flat were Poles, who spoke
placatingly with the Russian soldiers and thus saved us and all those who lived
above us, at Berlin N 65, Togostr. 32 E, from rape and looting. - J.Z.,
30.1.03.)
History always repeats itself, so that it is sufficient to
change the names in old Homer to get modern history and any other. But - - as
often remarked - - history does not repeat itself in every respect. In
details there are progresses and regresses, if such a "facon de
parler" is permitted. Such a detail is represented in Homer. Here the old
reporter of robber romances tells us (Song 11, verse 367), that Alkioous, chief
of the pirates, is very touched and says expressly: "Odysseus, I see that
you are not a worse robber than myself, I believe you. Robber-minded stories,
as you told us, cannot be invented. Here I am an old expert! He was
quite overwhelmed by pity to hear of Odysseus's back luck in plundering
Ismaros. He resolved to compensate Odysseus (not at his own expense: Song 11,
verse 340.)
And here is the
progress, considered from the a standpoint of outsiders, like you and I. What
would you do, if Odysseus came one day to you, brought in by your
Nausikaa, and told you, what misfortune he had at Ismaros? I think that
you would phone Wimbledon's police station and tell Nausikaa: My dear daughter,
if you meet such a boy again, as you introduced here today, do not be impressed
at first sight. There are such and such.
-----------------------
Modern men are - - concerning robberies like devaluations -
- still at the state of old Phasakes. They do not consider it as a crime.
But 3,000 years later they will.
I heartily greet
your daughter, who is young enough to live to see the victory of the Free
Banking idea.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
22. 8.
1949. My letter of 14.8.49, page 4.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
until now the theorists of international law treated States
as individuals and supposed that the same doctrines
are applicable to the moral law for individuals and to the
actions of and against States. Such a confusion can do no good, as is seen in
the case of Germany. The question is:
1.) What minimum of obligations can be imposed upon the
single, adult German, considered from a standpoint of reciprocity?
2.) What maximum personal liberty must be granted to the
single German, also considered from a standpoint of reciprocity?
An impartial
investigation concludes:
Every man has a
right to choose his own government, but only so as Benjamin R. Tucker understood
the thing, Auberon Herbert, and others. But a man has not the right to demand
that others constitute for him a government as he likes it, located in that and
that town, commanding that and that territory, etc.
So it was by no
means a moral duty of the Allied to organise a German government over the whole
of West Germany, endow it with the power to prescribe upon its subjects certain
monetary abuses, such as the issue of a forced currency, etc. If the teachers
of the right of nations taught, that it was a moral duty, they were very
much mistaken.
To get a maximum of
personal liberty in Germany (and not only in Germany), it should be divided
into communities as small
as is politically and economically possible.
(J.Z.: Alas, here, too, he still upholds territorialism
rather than individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and only
exterritorial autonomy for their voluntary communities. Under Free Trade, which
all would be free to adopt, they would not need any exclusive territories but
merely exclusive private and cooperative etc. properties while the
Protectionists etc. could voluntarily segregate themselves and boycott others
as much as they liked. - But B. might have been engaged only in discussing what
he thought to be politically practicable then or acceptable to a mind like that
of M. - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
The theory is - - not completely - - expounded by Proudhon
in his "Du principe fédératif" and the practice in Switzerland, by
the Germany before 1914 (rather before 1860? - J.Z.) (not less cultivated than
any country in the world) and the USA, where there are States the size of Swiss
cantons and yet neither economically nor culturally nor politically inferior to
New York.
If there are people - - like Communists - - who wish to he
governed by a central power, I say to them:
Organise that
power! Cede to the power as much of your income as you think fit. Imitate the
sect whose chief is the well known Aga Khan, from whom loafers robbed
some pounds of Jewels, some weeks ago at Monte Carlo, sacrificed to him by his
adherents, who by this sacrifice - - as they firmly believe - - accumulated a
good "karma" and will be
reborn as angels, white elephants, holy apes or gods in some heaven.
You, communists, will certainly also find some Aga Khan, who generously accepts
your gifts, supplies you with prescriptions to produce and to consume, forbids
you books etc., which endanger your spiritual welfare, etc. But: Do not
compel others to imitate you.
What concerns the
others, they will not sacrifice 80 % of their labour to a government. They want
personal liberty, etc. That - - at present - - in only possible by an alliance
with the Western World and a precaution so that not another totalitarian
government like the Hitlerian can arise. A Federalism such as Proudhon proposed
it, is the best means. (Did he propose federalism between small territorial
States or between sovereign individuals? - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
Like all good
things in the world this Federalism cannot be upheld without brutal force, just
like the wallet of anyone of us cannot be protected without brutal force. (That
force does not have to be and should not be "brutal", but merely
defensive, with as much defensive force as is required! - J.Z., 30.1.03.) Today that means:
a.) At least one
million German soldiers, well armed and always on the Qui vive at the frontier,
b.) at least
one million of English, American, etc. soldiers also at the frontier and allied
with the Germans.
(J.Z.: "the" Germans never existed and do not
exist now. Standing armies do not offer the best protection. Elsewhere B.
advocated an ideal form of militia for the protection of individual rights -
and also for liberation efforts without any "brute" force being used.
- J.Z., 30.1.03.)
If one day the
about four millions of Russian soldiers are dismissed, then things are changed.
(J.Z.: Then these 4 millions were "in the hands"
of a Stalin. But they were not all Russians. Perhaps even the majority among
them was born among the over 100 other suppressed minorities in the Soviet
Empire, beside the suppressed Russians. Alas, the Western World's freedom
lovers did not sufficiently ponder the overthrow of a regime like Stalin's and
the liberation of all its involuntary victims. They still have not done so for
the remaining tyrannies. - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
There is no other
means to avoid a slavery worse than Hitlerism, not only for Germany but for the
whole West, too. (What about the fostering of an uprising of military and other
slaves in that tyranny? - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
Suppose, there will
be no such army at the frontier. What will be the effect - some days
after the beginning of the next war? About six millions of German workers will
be compelled to make ammunition for the Soviets, and two weeks later 4 million
French workers will help them. Four weeks later, the rest of Europe will work
for the Soviets, very probably England, too.
I don't speak of
atomic bombs which - - you certainly have read it - - the Soviets are now
testing in the Kirghizian steppe.
---------------------
You may object: The
hate of the Germans, as a consequence of the continued dismantling is now to
great that it will be easy for the Russians to cause the Germans to desert and
to come to them. (Soviets =/= Russians! "Demontagen" in East Germany
were even worse! - J.Z.) In that Russians are good experts; their first very
successful action in this direction was to win the whole Czech army in the
first weeks of the first world war. The Czechs deserted to the Russians - - the
colonel of each regiment at it's top - - and, to say the truth, they were very
well received and treated. The objection is probably right at present. People
like Vansittard have achieved what the secret Nazi-Propaganda never did. The
latter is no longer taken serious, but Vansittard is taken serious and
deserves it.
--------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
28.8.1949.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
it may be that Free Banking gets an assistance from a
side not expected but predicted many years ago, long before WW II. I append
here a paper, "Telegraph", weekly edition, from which you may see,
what forgery plays in Western Germany. It may be that central
note-issuing becomes technically impossible in a short time. The main
difficulty is - - I think - - that no paper dares to publish an article about
anything which seems to endanger the present note-monopoly.
-----------------
Some weeks ago, I
tried, at a meeting of the Social Democratic Party, to explain that the present
monopolistic system violates the right of the workers to be always supplied
with as many means of payment as to uphold production, which no genius can do
in Frankfurt, while the means of payment are wanted at Hamburg or Munich. Much
less can it be done by the gentlemen now doing banking business and having no
other recommendation than their pitiable role in the great crisis of 1932. You
will believe me that I was laughed at.
----------------
I think that you
will have read that Hitler, during the war, got English notes printed in great
quantities. In 1945 these printers (workers) took these notes together with the
printing machines with them. A part was discovered a year or so ago.
Notes from
"small" bankers, very probably, will not be forged. It's not worthwhile.
The snide (? forgery - J.Z.) would be detected in a few days.
-----------------
The
"Sozialdemokrat" of 14.7.1949 reports that the New York firm Bache
& Co. sells tins, containing 100 ounces of fine gold, for 3,945 Dollars.
There are many buyers. If the information is true, then 39.45 Dollars per ounce
could be considered as the true value of one ounce expressed in Paper Dollars.
-----------------
In his book
"The Prince", Machiavelli remarks (chapter 6) that all armed
prophets won. This remark of 1532, when the "principe" was first
printed (some say it was printed 1515), has not been refuted by history. Hitler
and Stalin may also be considered as armed prophets. (They won, at least
temporarily! - J.Z., 30.1.03) Their doctrine is a religion, although a
very bad one.
----------------
A Greek historian
(who's name I forgot - - Thukydides??) reported: Spartan men were absent for a
long time and peace seemed far away. Then Sparta's women sent a message to the
army and pointed out that, since for a long time no children were born, the
State was obviously in danger. The army must admit this danger and send 50
handsome warriors to Sparta with all the virility necessary to propagate the
race. The 50 men did their duty and did it well, but about 20 years later the
new generation had the greatest difficulties. The "legitimately" born
would not recognise them as equal by birth. The law proved to be ineffective.
The story seems very credible.
(J.Z.: How many of the children born, supposedly as a result
of this government "action", were actually fathered by the male
household slaves? - The free Greek males certainly used the female slaves as
sex objects. Why not the free women? Do we have here one of the minor causes
for the downfall of Sparta? - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
29. 8. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I bought - - although it was light-headed - - for 30
East-Mark a copy of Webster's Complete English Dictionary, edition 1882, price
in this year = 1 L + 11 Shill. + 9 Pence.
5.60 East-mark are
now sold for 1 West-mark. The quotations at Zuerich were:
1 L
= 11.45 Swiss Franc,
100 West-marks = 68.00 Swiss Franc.
So that the price
of the Dictionary was:
30 x 1 x 68 x 1 = 0.382 L
= 6 s. 4 d.
5.6 100 11.45
Cheap, I think.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
The Dictionary's weight =
4.4 kilograms = 9.77 pounds, 1 pound = 453.59 grams.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
3.9.1949. Your letter of 25.8.49,
received 29.8.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
with real pleasure I read your remark:
"A company
may insure me against fire, although we both know that if all the buildings
insured in this company
are burned down
together, the company may be unable to pay."
Although you are
not an Insurance man, you found out here a very important point in the
insurance business, which more than 99 % of insurance men do not find
out. A slight generalisation lets us see that here we have to do with a very
general principle governing social, political and individual life. For more
than 1 1/2 centuries it has not been discussed - - as far as I know.
The danger that
the premiums received are not sufficient to pay all damages may be as small as
any optimist may
estimate it, but it never becomes zero. Theoretically that is clear a priori.
From time to time practice confirms the theory. Before the great conflagration
of San Francisco in 1907 - - following the earthquake - - one read in many
books, that an experience of many decades had proven: The sum of all
damages in one year never exceeded a certain limit. And, nevertheless, in that
year the damages exceeded the average sum, observed for decades, very
considerably, and many insurance companies became bankrupt. Since that year the
earthquake clause became general.
A similar case was,
perhaps, the great loss in Middle Europe in the year 1921. The year was
extremely hot. The companies' reserves were destroyed by the inflation. It was
the general opinion in that year, that the German companies were saved simply
by the progress of inflation beginning in October 1921.
The first scientist
who earnestly considered the problem was Jacques Bernoulli, whose book
on probabilities ("Ars conjectandi") was published 1713, 8 years
after B.'s death. (Burnt 1943) B. said, that there must be a probability which,
in practice, can be considered as zero and he proposed to accept the fraction
1/ 10.000 as this probability, as long as facts or better reflections than his
may lead to the acceptance of another fraction. As applicable cases Bernoulli
mentioned: The obligations of an insurance company or of single merchants who
granted an insurance, other obligations of merchants, decisions of judges and
some others which I forgot.
Some decades later Buffon,
in his "Arithmétique morale" (*) again considered the problem and
proposed the fraction 1/100,000 as a probability which, in practice, could be
considered as zero. Buffon said: 1/100,000 is about the probability for a
healthy man to live at least 24 hours. Everybody, in normal times, is convinced
to be alive the next day and insofar, in his practice, takes the probability of
1/100,000 as zero.
(*) (Microfiched by me in PEACE PLANS 332. I would like to
get a German or English translation, to enable me to read it. - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
But in insurance
business the question arises whether the probabilities are known well enough by
mere observation, even if the observation would include a period of many
decades. Therefore - - at least in Germany - - some founders of insurance
companies inserted a clause: In cases of excessive damages, the company will
raise a fresh payment from the insured, but not more than a certain multiple of
the normal premium. Damages, which cannot be paid by such fresh payments, shall
be considered as not insured.
Example: The first insurance conditions of the Gotha Fire
Insurance Company, published 1820, demanded that every insured must hand over
to the company a bill of exchange for an amount of the eight-fold of the normal
premium. The usefulness of the clause was seen at the conflagration of Hamburg
in 1842. The Gotha Clause shifted the risk from the company to the insured and
was a very good solution, certainly a much better one than the omission of
every clause - - as at modern insurance companies - - for the case that
unexpected risks disturbed the normal business.
At the inflation
time in Austria were founded hundreds of small insurance companies which
insured not in paper crowns but in grain or other real values. The greatest
part of the insured were peasant. All these small companies had clauses similar
to the old Gotha Cause.
I think, that if by
such clauses commercial risks may be eliminated, that is a better solution than
to consider the risk to be zero, just because it can be estimated to come to
less than 1/10,000 or 1/100,000 or so.
Concerning the
redemption of bank notes, experience has proven that the risk is much greater
than 1/10,000. At the moment, I am not able to verify that assertion, my
library being burnt.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Notes considered as
loan certificates.
Certainly you are
right if you say: "If I owe B. Pound 10 and he owes me L 10, it were
obviously foolish for us both to pay
over L 10 to the other."
For your, for me
and for many other people it would be foolish. But Jevons in his
book "Money" (burnt) tells us, that still in the 19th
century the merchants of Manchester as well as those of Liverpool - - certainly
no blockheads, considered
clearing as a most unreliable means of paying. Every day a messenger was sent
from Manchester to Liverpool, who paid, with notes, for the cotton, brought
from Liverpool to Manchester.
In Germany a law of
the Nazi-time is in force, by which banks or any other money institutions are
prohibited from creating accounts which are not to be transformed into cash but
which can only be used for clearing purposes. From their standpoint the Nazis
were quite in the right. Clearing means independence from the State Bank. The
Nazis wanted everybody to be dependent upon the State Bank and exposed to
economic (or physical) annihilation if the State Bank would not grant him means
of payment.
Tyrannical governments do, from time to time, issue such
laws. The first seems to have been issued by Chamillard, minister of Louis XIV., after the death of Colbert: His notes had to
be used in every private payment for an amount of 1/4. (Obviously, of the
amount to be paid. - J.Z.) (I quote from Roscher, "Nationalökonomik des
Handels und Gewerbfleisses", 7th edition, 1899, page 325, $
52.)
Interesting is that Laws, as the quoted German one, are not
considered to be tyrannical but as increasing stability in trade, and this by
the people as well as the average economists. (Marx calls them:
Vulgär-Ökonomisten") (And Marx was perhaps the worst of them! - J.Z.,
30.1.03.)
("Den Teufel spürt
das Völkchen nie,
"Und wenn er sie beim Kragen
hätte." - Goethe, Faust) (Translated somewhere above. - J.Z.)
In judging notes
of the old style, the mentality factor cannot be discarded.
One party
says: Merchants are so important persons for the community, that they must be
endowed with the permission to raise loans from the people in a way, that the
people have merely theoretically the choice to escape the raising of the loan,
but not in practice. Nobody can refuse notes if there are no other means of
payment at hand.
Another
party says: There should be no more compulsion in the community than is
necessary. A means of payment, based on the clearing principle (such as the
certificates issued on the basis of the "Four Bills") should at least
be permitted. If they are permitted, then any other principle may compete with
the "Clearing Certificates".
Both parties start
from a certain mentality, the second from a mentality not very far from
Anarchism. (Admitted,
but justified by Benjamin R. Tucker.) Among the
authors of the "Four Bills", there was only one, who conceived
completely the mental basis of the clearing principle, but he was prudent
enough to keep his opinion for himself.
The difference
between a note of the old style and a clearing certificate becomes
evident also from other considerations.
To credit
belongs, essentially, a time, for which the credit is granted. If the
creditor is entitled realise his claim at any time, and if the debtor is ready
to realize the claim at any time, without delay, the connection between the two
parties is not any more that of creditor to debtor but of claimant to obligee.
Zander, in his treatise about railway money explained the difference well. If
the railway pays wages and other expenses by certificates which it accepts at any time for tickets and freight charges,
these certificates are no loan raised by the railway from the public.
But if the railway issued so many certificates, that the possessor of the
certificates eventually must wait until he gets an opportunity to
exchange it for a ticket, then the railway becomes a debtor and the
ticket-possessor a creditor, and then the sum of the issued (and not
immediately usable - J.Z., 30.1.03.) certificates becomes a loan raised
from the public.
This difference may
seem to be merely theoretical and "hair splitting", but, in practice
it is important and the non-distinguishing does, thereby, announce a mentality
quite different from the mentality which distinguishes the two relations.
If in every
case the railway, issuing certificates, is considered as really raising loans
from the public, or a group of shops, issuing certificates, accepted at the
shops as money, is considered as raising a loan from the public, then
the possibility of exchanging the certificates against goods or services is
merely a collateral security and the obligation to exchange the certificates in
this way is a burden, imposed upon a debtor, who is also trustworthy without
that obligation.
Trust of the possessor of the certificates is the
most essential element in his relation to the issuer of the certificates.
(J.Z.: Only at the moment of accepting them. Essentially,
there would be close to certainty that the issuer would accept them for his
goods and services any time and could do so. That could be almost immediately
tested. As for the right to issue, without thereby burdening anyone else but
oneself, spreading rights rather than additional obligations by the issues:
Morally, one should be at liberty to oblige oneself to deliver immediately
goods and services, to the limits of one's supply capacity, in a technically
perfected form, with transferable certificates or accounts, on paper or
electronically, without this being interpreted or really being, an imposition,
in any way, any burden laid upon others. The own goods- and service vouchers
are such IOUs. Their value is judged by others, evaluated and rated and perhaps
refused. But if they do accept them, then they are only under the "burden"
to claim or collect or accept the offered goods or services. If they do not
claim them, then they have no one to blame but themselves. It would be as if
they had bought a cinema or theatre or concert ticket and then thrown it away.
It is also obvious that no one could cause an inflation with such
"tickets" or self-imposed obligations to deliver goods or services,
immediately. People will not be ready to accept more of these IOUs than they
expect to be able and willing to use, soon, especially when these tickets or
goods- or service warrants are also time-limited. And the issuer will not
oblige himself beyond his capacity to deliver. Goods and service side do then,
obviously and necessarily, stay in close balance with the kind of money or
tickets etc. issued and streaming back "for redemption" in goods and
services, for all such "private money" issues. - Elsewhere B. pointed
out that "distrust" or the "discount possibility" is also
an essential part of this monetary freedom system. Any discount, arising out of
ignorance or distrust, would accelerate the reflux of these "tickets"
for "redemption" into the ready for sale goods and services, and
would thereby remove them and the distrust, rather rapidly. - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
But if the issuing
is not considered as raising a loan from the public, then the
relationship is very much changed. That the existing legislation has not yet
recognised the special nature of the here given relationship does not prove the
non-existence of such relationships. Trust is now required in no higher degree
and of no other kind than the purchaser of a postage stamp at the post office
must have in the post's reliability. This kind of trust is different from a
creditor's trust, not merely in degree but in kind. The obligation of the issuer
to exchange his certificates against his goods or services, is now no more a
burden - - and perhaps an unnecessary one - - but, on the contrary, the way of
least economic resistance. On the other hand, the obligation to redeem the
certificate in gold or whatever the standard of value may be, is not any more
essential, although, in the case of a loan it may be an essential
means to maintain trust.
It seems, the complete
theory of the here possible relationships has not yet been worked out.
(Freedom for all non-coercive monetary, clearing and credit
relationships as well as for all non-coercive sexual and religious
relationships! - J.Z., 30.1.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
My ethic Christian
????????????????? Firstly:
The Christian ethic declines Justice, the word
taken in its usual sense, which Christ himself emphasised (Matth. chapter 20
and other passages). But Kant said: "Let Justice prevail, even if
all scoundrels in the world would perish" and asserted that this was the
true meaning of "Fiat Justitia, pereat mundus".
( Excuse me - - but
my Webster does not distinguish Justice and justice. What's the
matter?)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
"… your
altruistic pleasure as one among other pleasures ... "
Knohi Sauton !!!! says the Delphian god, and it's
much less easy than it seems. Kant asserts that nature will
perform its intentions by our actions and for this reason
sometimes accompanies them with pleasure and sometimes with feelings of another
kind. I think - - and hope to agree with Kant - - that the subsumption of many-
fold feelings, now etymologically subsumed under the word
pleasure, is not the best treatment of the different notions from a
philosophical standpoint.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Glory - -
atom-bombs will, probably, in a few years, lay the glorious beside the
inglorious, the egoistic beside the altruistic and the clearing house certificate
holder beside the bearer of a gold redemption note, if at that time both are
not still prohibited, which is the most probably.
Glory - -
I beg you to believe me - - without detailed proof - - that my resemblance
to Achilles is very moderate and - - I am afraid - - would not be
acknowledged by that great boxer and corpse desecrator.
But: In one point I do resemble him (not
equal him): When he said, that it was no glory to be a king among the shadows
of the subterranean world, I do agree and add only, that even royal splendour
among men cannot seduce the philosopher. If our friends say: He did,
what he could, although a weak, mortal man, that's glory enough.
----------------
Cooperation. Your conjecture that the dividends
attract many women, even in cases where the commodities in cooperative stores
are inferior, has much weight. In Germany, some decades ago, people observed
the same. Private shops competed then, successful, by granting dividends also,
by issuing "Wertmarken" (coupons, value stamps, very small credit
tokens - J.Z.), but the government prohibited them, which was unjust and silly.
(J.Z: My father showed me once a whole book filled with this
legislation and the commentaries on it. Those, who, like him, still tried to
find loopholes in these laws, regulations and juridical decisions, had
certainly a big job on hand, and, if they temporarily succeeded, then a small
segment of the flood of current legislation, regulations and juridical
decisions would soon close it again. The same applies to tax laws,
protectionism, foreign exchange controls, the remnants of the capital markets
etc. Nothing else helps here than individual secessionism, combined with
exterritorial autonomy, started by either a monetary revolution or a general
tax strike or by people and soldiers seceding en masse from a warlike
government and genuine citizen-militias of volunteers, knowing and appreciating
all their individual rights that have so far been discovered. Today freedom is
not impossible - it is simply outlawed, in almost every sphere. The little that
formally remains has still to be fought for, all too often, in expensive and
long court battles and even these self-defence options are often denied, e.g.,
by many forfeiture laws. In all too many respects, we have revived the worst
aspects of absolutist monarchism and mercantilism. Somebody should try to make
an objective evaluation of the wrongful burdens placed upon American
colonialists by English Kings and Parliamentary "representatives"
with those which "liberated" Americans have "placed upon
themselves" -through their "elected"
"representatives". I believe their burdens today, reckoned in gold
weight values, imposed labours and prevented opportunities are much larger than
they were then. And then they did rise, considering their minor burdens as
already too large, compared with the liberties they could still experience at
least at the frontiers - of if they choose to join a Red Indian tribe. - J.Z.,
23.05.03.)
Scarcity of Dollars. Agreed!
Unemployment.
Your arguments are not without foundation but the present situation
shows that the relations of workers to employers are on an unsound basis.
In Russia the share
of the managers of cooperatives in the product is - - I learned it from several
articles - - greater than the share of employers in England and in America.
That could be o n e reason to transform as many concerns as possible
into cooperatives, whose managers are the present proprietors, as long as they
live. Workers should immediately have to confront the real barriers for
wages, which will be the case only if they are organised in a cooperative. On
the other hand, there is no sound reason why they should not get higher wages
if there really exists the economic possibility to increase the present wages.
Free Banking is - -
I think - - a means to better the state of human society and should not be
used, and in that way discredited, in class warfare battles. Free Banking
should contribute to apportion, in a just way, the product among workers,
managers and the others involved in production. It should not be used to
exploit workers by employers or - - I know cases in Berlin - - employers by
employees, or to exploit both by commerce (very frequent) or commerce by
production, as in countries with price control.
(Fiat justitia, pereat mundus!)
-------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 4.9.1949. Your letter of 25.8.49, received 29.8.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
today I find in the Colloquia of Luther, published about 300 years ago,
that passage:
Des Evangelii Art. (The
true nature of the gospel.) (The wisdom of the Evangelium? - J.Z.)
"Cassia
ist Zimtrinden gleich, hat die Kraft, dass es die Augen purgiert und reinigt,
und ist gut wider Ottern- und Schlangenbisse. Ist ein Bild des Evangelii,
welches die Finsternis vertreibt und bringet das Licht wieder und ist eine
gemeine Arznei, etc."
(Cassia resembles
the bark of cinnamon; it has the power to purge and to clean the eyes and is
good against stings of snakes and bites of adders. It's a symbol of the gospel,
which expels darkness, restores light and is a common medicine. etc.)
From time to time
good old remedies are simply forgotten. Is Cassia still known as a
remedy for cataract???????? (Obviously
this was what Luther meant.)
-----------------
Rheumatism. For years it was my habit to drink, before
going to sleep, one cup of peppermint tea or two. If I do so now, I can be sure
to wake up, 2 hours later, with all symptoms of rheumatism in the calves. Other
drinks have the same effect. Some time ago, I had an opportunity to talk about
this with a very intelligent lady, who said to me that she had observed the
same and since that time drinks nothing for 3 hours before sleeping.
------------------
I received today
1.) "Truth" of 26. 8. 1949,
2.) "The Economist" of 20.8.1949,
3.) "National News-Letter" of 11.8.1949.
Thank you very
much.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
5.9.1949. Your letter of 25.8.49, received 29.8.49.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
Colour bar - -
certainly - - the Hereros were
treated by the German government as coloured people generally are treated by the
White. I am far from excusing it. What concerns the treatment by the colonists,
I heard from several people, returned from South West Africa, that the Negroes
preferred a job with German colonists to any other. If that should be true - -
and I learnt so many details from my acquaintances, that I am inclined to
believe it, they will have done so because they considered the Germans as the
lesser evil, not because they loved them or hoped to march together with their
masters "to the top of civilisation".
But for me all that is not important. A man is responsible
for that which is in his power. He is not responsible for the acts of a
government which taxes him, also not for acts of other people who speak the
same language as he or confess the same religion or share his prejudices. He
may be suspected to emphasise criminal acts or the principles for which they
were committed, but not as much as he may be judged by his own acts or words.
As for myself, I am
member
1.) of the République supranationale, whose founder was H.
L. Follin,
2.) of the "Cosmopolitische Union", founded by
Werner Ackermann.
Both Associations (I joined them a short time before 1933,
demanded from their members a declaration that nationality would never
be, for them, an consideration to judge men and that, insofar, the member gave
up his nationality altogether.
If a Herero tribe
would today introduce the mutual banking principle, then I would, at once, beg
for the honour to be accepted as an assistant member of the tribe.
If you have an
opportunity to read "La solidarité sociale" by G.-L. Duprat, Paris, 1907,
please read at first the chapter "La responsabilité collective". On
page 103 Duprat says inter alia":
"La plupart des sacrifices humains sont le fruit d'une
croyance universelle à la responsabilité collective dans le cas
d'offences individuelles." Duprat further says some most valuable things.
Concerning the
Senegal Negroes I do admit that they were perfect gentlemen compared with the
SS-men who spread Nazi-"Culture" in Poland and in the Ukraine. And I
think than more than 3/4 of all Germans admit it too.
Intermarriage?
I know that the people with the longest colonial experience, the Portuguese, favour
intermarriages and with best success
- - the thing considered from a
political standpoint. If the offspring of intermarriages are well treated then
this is the best support for the white race. If I were a statesman I would
favour intermarriages, too.
But: Are
intermarriages in the personal interest of those involved? There are
such and such. Here in Berlin, I
knew before the war the owners of two Chinese restaurants.
Both were married to German women. Both women were content with their husbands
and told me, that they were probably better treated than German wives are by
their husbands. From people who lived in India, I learnt that marriages with
Indian girls are not to be recommended. The superstition of Indian women
surpasses all limits and their mentality - - I heard - - is that of women of
the lowest classes in Germany, even if they belong to the Brahman caste. Very
good were the experiences with Suaheli girls and women, reported by some of my
acquaintances. Their notions of cleanliness are different from German notions
but their character is excellent, also they are willing to learn and to accept
European manners. One fault is, my acquaintances reported - - that they treated
the children of white men too well, with the result, that the children
become insolent.
After 1870 a
literature came up in Germany which intended to introduce a "racial mentality" into Germany.
The authors had no success. There was never a strike if, e.g. a Negro worked at
a German harbour and I know of no example where any couple was troubled because
one partner was coloured, except during the Nazi-time. But the Nazi-Literature
itself confirms that "racial mentality" was not a feature of the
German race, or more exactly spoken, of 9/10th of it. (Antisemitism
set apart.) Goebbels and many others repeated constantly that Germans
must now begin to think in racial notions and that it must
be the aim of the NSDAP to "educate" the people in this sense. In the
South of the USA such admonitions would have been very superfluous.
One of the
reasons for which the Germans in the USA were hated and in contempt and still
are is: At the slavery time (before 1863, when Lincoln freed all slaves) and
later, the Germans did not exclude the Negroes from their
circles. And more: When a slave fed, he tried to come into a
district where Germans lived. There he was sure not to be betrayed. Often the
Germans liberated a slave whom the American police had captured. On this I read
some stories.
At present my
impression is, that the American Negro-Soldiers are much more welcome among the
Germans (girls included) than the Americans themselves. I would not say this if
my acquaintances did not get the same impression.
(An aside: In May,
when the Blockade was finished, but from time to time the Russians captured
trucks with cargo, the American Military Government one day sent some Negro
soldiers with each truck. All were men of 6 feet and strong as buffaloes. The
Russian soldiers, obviously, had never before seen Negroes and were so
terrified that the formalities, normally taken hours, were this time fulfilled
in less than two minutes, for more, than 100 autos.)
The propaganda
against the Senegal-Negroes in 1918 and later, was the work of a very small
group but well trained in propaganda. What I heard personally at Mühlheim on
the Rhine was: The Negroes and the Moroccan Soldiers were much better than the
French themselves; nobody had expected this.
(J.Z.: They should have. France was partly occupied and a
battle-zone for years, while Negroes and Moroccans, like many Germans after
1918, had experience with French colonialism. Moreover, Negroes and Moroccans,
as such, were not attacked by German forces, at least not in their home-lands.
Naturally, under their conditions, they were part of the French forces. - J.Z.,
31.1.03.)
----------------
Dismantling in
Germany, Victor Gollancz and the "Jew-Question".
English politicians
should read the "Principe" of Machiavelli, chapter 5, last sentence.
There M. speaks of conquered States and distinguishes - - very well - -
conquered republics and other States. He says:
"In conquered
republics, there is always much hatred against the conquerors and the lost
liberty will never be forgotten. Therefore, the conqueror must destroy them or
chose them for his residence."
Another passage of the same chapter is:
"Who becomes master of a community which
before lived in liberty and does not dissolve the community may, with
certainty, expect to be ruined by the conquered community."
History confirms
the opinion of this old expert. Napoleon says in the "Mémoires de
Saint-Hélène", that his fault
was not to destroy Prussia. He had reduced the country to 4 millions of
inhabitants, and commanded himself more
than 50 millions even after his defeat of 1812, and, nevertheless, it was that
little Prussia which destroyed his power or, more exactly spoken, decided the
issue of the war, begun 1813.
For English
politicians it is now too late to destroy Germany. Therefore, only the second
of the Machiavellian possibilities remains, that is, an essential part of the
English Government must be removed to Germany and the Germans must be treated
on and equal footing with the English subjects. Every other measure means the
third possibility of Machiavelli, that is, destruction of the English power
with the help of Germany. The help may be forced - - as it certainly will be -
- but it will be no less effective. Remember the role of Czecho-Slovakia in the
last war. Her factories worked against England and the workers sympathised with
England and daily heard the BBC. The latter was quite unimportant.
What the English
politicians do now, is simply craziness. The dismantling of German factories
will not prevent one English town from being destroyed once the Russians (the
Soviet regime! - J.Z.) begins the next war and will not even retard the
occupation for one hour. But the dismantling will diminish the resistance of
German workers if the Kremlin transports the to Russia or Siberia. There the
German workers will make guns, V2 rockets etc., not to talk of atomic bombs.
(On a gut level, the former workers of the dismantled
factories will see this as depriving them of their jobs, i.e., their means to
survive. Even a cornered rat will tend to fight. - J.Z., 31.1.03.)
Stephen King-Hall,
in his "National News-Letter" of 11.8.1949 says quite rightly, that
the 100, 000 English soldiers now in Germany are as good as nothing. - If there
are not at least 1 million of English soldiers, 1 million of Americans and some
100,000 of Germans, then there is no real power to stop the Russian attack.
These numbers may seem fantastic but the real number of Russian soldiers
immediately behind the "Iron Curtain", is hardly less than 3
millions, which the English politicians should know as well as others know it.
The German part of the newly created army must be treated so that it is not
tempted to play the role of the Prussian Army under Yorck, who concluded the
celebrated Convention of Tauroggen with the Russian general Diebitsch, on the
30th of December 1812.
I do admit that it
is useless to talk about this. English politics is made by people like
Vansittard and Bevin, who know as much of history as of monetary theory,
that is: Nothing.
----------------
I forgot the name
of the German professor (a Jew), who fled at the Nazi-Time to England. He was
one of the best atomic-theorists. In the England of the year 1939 he was
considered as a "German", and, really, the "German"
authorities had taxed him, his language was German and his passport announced
him as a German citizen. The English - - quite logical and applying the old
biblical principle of collective responsibility (The subjects account for the
acts of the government that taxed them and gives them passports) - - would lock
him up in a concentration camp. The professor must be a "German".
But, unluckily, the professor did not share the English views on collective
responsibility, fled to the Russians and was very well accepted there. He built
up the factories for Russian atomic bombs and some weeks ago the seismographs
in the whole world announced that he had been quite successful. (I attach a
clipping which Rittershausen sent me.) The earthquake that came from the
Kirghizian steppe announced the beginning of a new epoch of history or - -
perhaps - - the end of history itself. That was the practice of the
theory of collective responsibility.
------------------
Victor Gollancz is no adherent of the collective
responsibility principle. That places him very high above his contemporaries.
Their greatest part is unable to emancipate themselves from that principle.
Maybe V.C. was born as a Jew. I think that now he is no longer a Jew but
belongs to the little community of men where nobody is asked: "Where do you come
from?" but "Where do you go?" - to quote Nietzsche.
What V. G. says is
quite right: "… time is desperately
short - a matter not of years or months but of weeks and days."
---------------------
Stuart R. de la
Mahotiere is one of those, who cannot see and therefore cannot judge
the real situation. He says: "… Suffice it to say that if full national
sovereignty is restored - - as one day it obviously must be - - …
"Stuart R. de la Mahotiere (his name lets conjecture
that his ancestors belonged to the people who, under William the Conqueror played the role which the Russians
will play with the help of 20,000
aeroplanes in one of the next years) is very much mistaken if he thinks
that one day national sovereignty (as the word is now understood by average
politicians) must be restored. On the contrary, that restoration
must be prevented by all means. What now must be restored that is the old
national unity of the emigrated Saxons (Hengist and Horsa - - the story seems
to be true) and the Saxons who had remained in Germany. If that aim will not be
attained, then Machiavelli will be in the right and England is lost (in any
case as a State, but, perhaps, also as a society) and it will be a bad
consolation that Germany will be lost too.
She will be lost with dismantling and without.
St. R. de la M.
says: "In seeking to adopt a Christian solution to the German problem, Mr.
Gollancz does, apparently, overlook the necessity of doing elementary justice
to the victims of German aggression".
He does not
perceive that nations are no persons but notions. What a
nation is, depends upon military successes
of people forgotten today, on marriages of kings, on literature or
religions. If Clovis would not have defeated Syagrius, then married the
Burgundian princess Clotilda, then become (by the influence of this princess) a
Christian, then defeated Alaric II of the Visigoths, there would never have
existed a French nation. If Egbert of Wessex would not have conquered the seven
kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxons, there would never have been an English nation,
and Stuart R. de la M. would be executed for his opinion, that a man of
Northumberland should
consider a man of Kent as his countryman. If that is
admitted, then there never was a German aggression. There was a Hitlerian
aggression. And there was never an English attack on Berlin, on the
22.11.1943, by which my house, my library and some other things were destroyed,
but there was the obedience of some unlucky pilots, who were no more
responsible than the soldiers at Jerusalem, who crucified Jesus Christ and of whom
one can only say:
"Father - - if
you exist - - forgive them, they do not know what they are doing."
Yes - - if we had
the right religion, the Germans, who followed Hitler, would have killed him
before he could do harm and the English soldiers, who were ordered to destroy
Berlin, would have refused to obey and then both would have founded a new order
of things and everyone who demanded a continuation of the war would have been
sacrificed on the altar of the goddess Pax. This edifying scene would have
been filmed and reproduced every year for the great pleasure of the newly
created nation of Pacifists. But this religion is still to be created. (Please
- - the idea is not mine - - I talked about it 50 years ago with
revolutionaries who sought for such a religion.) Let me here remark, that if I
had studied for many years the philosophies of Kant and of Schopenhauer, it was
because the seemed to contain elements
of such a useful religion.
But - - the
religious side set apart - - it is
sufficient to consider humanity as one nation to whom its real unity is
concealed by the nationalists. If this consideration becomes universal, than
reparations by any "nation" would seem as "reasonable" as
if the Germans would demand reparations from the Mongol republic for the
aggression of the Mongols and the burning of Breslau in the year 1241. The
Mongols of today are proud to be the real and worthy successors of Genghis
Khan, may they pay for that dignity! Or - - if they decline - - they may tell
us, at what age the children of conquerors are no more responsible for
the crimes of their fathers (or, if the mothers worked in ammunition factories,
of the mothers too).
-----------------
I read with interest
the article of Eric Blumenfeld, too. He is a German nationalist, but
good-natured. I - - an
anti-nationalist must decline his arguments.
-----------------
That's all
"theory" - - well, well! But the next attack of Russia on Western
Europe is no theory; it would be impossible without the
"practice" of experts like Stuart R. de la Mahotiere, of Lord
Vansittard and such people. (There are Germans enough of the same rank - - you
know them as well as I do.)
(J.Z.: Really only: One false notion attacking another false
notion, not directly, because that is impossible, but by means of people who
are foolish enough to believe in the reality and the worth of such abstract
notions and who align themselves accordingly, to slaughter, suppress or exploit
each other. - J.Z., 1.2.03.
-----------------
You took the
trouble to copy my letter, reproduced in your letter of 8.8.1949 to the editor
of the Times. I am quite touched. But the situation is now such, that
the course of history (or the end of history) cannot any more be stopped.
"Fate show thy
force: Ourselves we do not owe,
"What is decreed
must be, and be this so." -
Shakespeare, 'Twelfth Night", Act I, end.
(J.Z.: How fast could alternative sound ideas actually be
spread and unsound ideas be effectively refuted - IF we made the fullest
possible use of all affordable and efficient as well as lasting alternative
media? - J.Z., 1.2.03.
-----------------
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v.
Beckerath.
I hope to write, in my next letter, some words about the
"Jew-question".
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 7.9.1949. My letter of
6. 9. 49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
you will have
read in English papers about what happened in Berlin when the Film "Oliver Twist" was to be shown. A number of
well-armed (Polish) Jews closed the theatre, treated the visitors pretty badly
and hurt a number of policemen. Their courage must be acknowledged, and if,
under the influence of old antisemitic propaganda, there were, still people who
believed the Jews to be cowards, they were disappointed in a very disagreeable
manner. Since these days the Jewish activity has much increased.
(J.Z.: The last sentence is literally B.'s English. I do not
know what he referred to here. Probably militant and well organised young
Jewish activists, sensitive to over-sensitive to any real or imagined slur upon
their good reputation. When I arrived in Australia in 1959, I found them very
active e.g. on the open air speaking centre in Sydney's "The Domain",
on Sunday afternoons. Later, they did not bother anymore, possibly because they
had run out of opponents. Among some under-educated Germans, the Jewish in
Israel people earned respect more for their military victories over Arab forces
than for their immense cultural achievements all over the world and especially
in Germany. - J.Z., 1.2.03.)
I enclose here a cutting from the "Tagesspiegel",
from which you may see, that it became really dangerous to utter in the streets
anything that may be interpreted by the "activists" among the Jews
(most Polish) as antisemitic. It is the same with literature. Books or other
literature, considered to be antisemitic by the activists, cannot be sold in
Berlin.
(J.Z.: Perhaps it is good that the memory of past atrocities
is kept alive even in this form and by laws like the Berlin one, which imposed
a prison sentence of up to 2 years upon any mere antisemitic remark in public.
I cannot blame these activists and such legislation. However, they neither
enlightens these activists and their sympathisers and the antisemitic or other
racist offenders, sufficiently, e.g., about the wrongfulness and absurdities of
collective responsibility and of territorial absolutism or majoritarianism,
whether practised by Nazis, Jews, Chinese, Indians, Negroes, Red Indians,
Japanese or any other racial, ethnic, national religious or ideological group.
- J.Z., 23.5.03.)
I had an
opportunity to talk about these matters with two Jewish families I know. They
are still more terrified than their German friends are and assured me - - what
needs no proof - - that the greatest part of the Jewish community (about 7,000
people - - before 1933 about 300,000 ) would prevent it if they could. But they
cannot. They see as clearly as we do, that the effect must be:
1.) Many people, who until now were friends of the Jews or
were indifferent, now become antisemites. I say: Friends of the Jews. It must
not be forgotten, that many thousands of Germans were brought to the
concentration camps simply because they did not stop their intercourse with
Jews or helped them as far as possible. My impression is that the number was
greater than the number of the imprisoned Jews. But here I may be mistaken and
a statistic about the two numbers is impossible.
(J.Z.: That was in the early stages. Later there were mass
arrests and deportations of Jews into the concentration and extermination
camps. But the first few hundred thousand inmates of Nazi concentration camps
were not Jews but other opponents of the regime. I read in a Berlin paper that
about 5,000 Jews survived in Berlin, hidden by their friends. Personally, I
know only about one of them, his Christian wife and their son, who was for a
while my friend - and introduced me to cigarettes and the black market. That
Jewish husband and father was hidden, under extreme and efficient precautions,
for many years in their flat. My mother, formally a Nazi party member, and working
as a lowly secretary in a Nazi propaganda department "Reichsamt fuer
Schrifttum, was its official name, I believe, also hid some of them, and other
illegals, temporarily. All visitors staying for more than 3 days had to be
reported to the police - or were reported by other informants. - Those, who hid
them, did risk not only their liberty but their lives and those of their
families, if found out by the regime. - J.Z., 1.2.03.)
I speak here of
average people. The opinion of others will not be altered, neither by any
antisemitic propaganda, nor the acts of the last weeks.
2.) As soon as the foreign military police in withdrawn, the
Jews will be hit as at the Nazi time. (A few hours later, the Russians will
have occupied whole of Berlin and will have a good moral reason to do so. But
the Berlin people prefers an occupation by the Western Allies. I do hope, that
the military police will not be withdrawn as long as I live. The new attacks
will be executed by no more people than those Jewish people, who attacked the
cinemas some months before. But the first impression - - of course - - will be
that the whole of Berlin organised a pogrom. The situation will be the same as
in September 1792 in Paris, when a few hundred fanatics began the
"September-murders". The first impression was, that the whole of
Paris was engaged in them and in some books it is still described in this way.
But at last Péthion stopped the murders, with very much snap (energy? - J.Z.),
some suitable words and a few National Guards.
(J.Z.: Now I wonder, whether this whole affair was not
organized by the Soviets in order to achieve what they failed to achieve
through the blockade. I vaguely heard of a similar plan later on, before the
Berlin Wall went up. They wanted to send many agents and provocateurs to West
Berlin - - to organise something that would seem to be an uprising of Nazis,
with the intention to publicise that as if it were a popular uprising and then
to march in, "to restore order". If well managed, this kind of show could
have been successful and deceived world opinion and would have, seemingly,
justified their occupation of West Berlin, whose few liberties were very felt
like thorns in their skins. - Maybe it will take still further decades before
the full truths on these affairs will be revealed, to the extent that they are
still recorded somewhere. The appeal of Neo-Nazis to West Berliners was so low
that, when my girlfriend, of Jewish descent, and I, with all our sympathies on
the Jewish side and that of other opponents of the Nazis, just out of
curiosity, once went to a well advertised propaganda meeting for them. We
found, in a large hall rented for this purpose, just the advertised speaker and
we two were the only ones, quite temporarily in attendance! We had a few words
with him, noticed his ignorance and prejudices and left him to meditate by
himself. - J.Z., 1.2.03.)
---------------------
It is said - - and
I think, rightly so - - that some Americans protect these (intolerant and
violent - J.Z.) Jews. They do not know what they do.
---------------------
The lesson is:
Nationalism is the same, whether Nazi or Jewish or any other.
--------------------
Western papers
state that German nationalism - - apart from the Jewish-Problem - - is growing.
That is also my impression. But this growth was inevitable.
Before 1945
Internationalism and Cosmopolitanism were wide-spread in Germany. I estimate
that about 1 % of the people were more Internationalists than Nationalists. 1 %
may seem very few, but in other countries the percentage was certainly much
lower.
Already in the year
1793 the German philosopher J. G. Fichte demanded from the then existing States
the permission for Non-Etatists to create their own social organisations, not
subject to national military laws, and said, that the by then existing Jewish
communities could serve as a model. (Fichte, "Considerations about the
French Revolution".)
In the year 1913 the movement had already considerable
influence and the "Syndicalist" Trade Unions (with about 20,000
members) supported it. After 1918 the movement still grew. Its history is still
to be written.
But what does the average man say now, if he hears
talk about Internationalism? He says
Internationalism is
swindle. The swindle began with Wilson's "17 Points". (He does not
know that the German Chancellor, Michaelis, publicly refused to accept these
"points" in the Reichstag.) The League of Nations was a continuation
of the swindle. It protected not one attacked nation. (He says this, because he
does not know the real history of the time 20 years ago. But the impression of
Mussolini's attack on Abyssinia was really deep and the indignation about the
failures of the League was great.)
Communists pretended to be Internationalists. But what did
Soviet-Communism do? It allied itself with Hitler. Later, during the war, the
German soldiers were appealed to, by Soviet leaflets, to leave the German army
and to come to the Russians, where they would be well treated. Even immediately
before the Occupation, Soviet leaflets, thrown down in great quantities by
Russian planes) spoke much of internationalism and "Proletarians of all
countries, unite!" - No comment is necessary.
And the British Labour Party? Is it not - - the average man
says - - a socialist party and, insofar, an internationalist one? And by what
government is dismantling mostly carried out?
The average man says still more of the same kind, which I
need not report here.
Then one of the few
still remaining Cosmopolitans, like myself, may answer: Well - -
Internationalism must be created. It is not so, that the failure of the
old Internationalism proves the necessity of a new Nationalism. - You may
imagine the answer of average people.
Further, it may be
mentioned here, that not a few of the old Internationalists thought much of the
Jews, precisely for the reason for which the Antisemites attacked the
Jews: Their Internationalism. And I knew some Jews who really said: For us
Internationalism is a national task, and consequently they rejected
Zionism.
-----------------
That's all
over. For an average German and,
especially a German youth, who learnt nothing about history, all warnings by
National-Socialism about Internationalism now become true!!
Cosmopolitans - -
like me - - are now really in the
position in which Bismarck placed them: In the position of a race
among the Germans, the Slavs, the Roman, etc., races. Lost sentinels - -
it seems.
------------------
We are
"visionaries", and the others are "practitioners" - - of
course. Their "practice" has
led them to the point where on the one side in the Kirghizian Steppe and on the
other side in some suitable place in Nevada, or wherever it may be, on the other
side, atomic bombs are waiting to speak their word, which is: Away with
these beings, the ones too blocked and the others too cowardly to deserve a
better life than they had. Atoms will replace both by their
Cosmopolitanism. (B. used, mostly, not always, "cosmopolitism"
instead. - J.Z.)
--------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Clearing-House-Certificates used In the Currency Famine
of 1893 (See: John DeWitt. Warner, "The Currency-Famine of 1893",
Sound Currency, years 1895 & 1896, were essentially the same as W. B.
Greene's notes, except that these Certificates were not used (very wisely) for
long term loans.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Russian Revolutionaries ask: Is there a system that enables
us to emancipate ourselves, within an hour from the Soviet Central Bank? Is
Free Banking (model 1934) such a system?
Answer: No! It requires some time to be realised and
requires conditions not given in the Russia of 1949.
Is the System of Warner suitable?
Answer: Yes, it is quite suitable. In the USA (by far not
merely in New York - - much more in small communities - - ) it was realised,
sometimes within a few minutes. Use it too!
---------------------
Bth.
7.9.19490
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
9. 9. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
in "Truth" of August 26, 1949, A. K. Chesterton
published an article: "Who Is For Britain?"
My modest reply to your question: "What do you think
about this article?" is: This article displeases me very much.
The heading:
"Who Is For Britain?" represents the British members of the
Strasbourg Assembly as men who are not
for Britain. Does Chesterton himself believe that they really are not for
Britain? If - - per impossibile - - there would arise a situation, in which
Britain's future would depend upon the readiness of every member to sacrifice
his life at once for Britain, say: a situation similar to that in which Decius
died for Rome, does Chesterton doubt that every member, at once and without
hesitating one minute, would sacrifice his life?
(J.Z.: A typical "ad hominem" exaggeration by B.
towards M. In Britain, too, there are many who would rather let millions perish
than risk their own lives. All too many do hate "their" government or
what they believe to be the ruling "society", so much that, for
various reasons, that they would be glad about the whole country and all its
people perishing. All "nations" contain many such "Catiline
existences" and will go on producing them, as long as they try to continue
as territorial nations, with their inherently numerous dissenters, who
would rather like to drop out and to their own things to and for themselves. -
We live in a world in which numerous terrorists strive to get their hands on
mass murder devices and many of them, those officials in power in all too many
States, have already succeeded in this. But they deny their terrorist practice
- and all too many believe them, in spite of e.g., the practice of MAD (Mutual
Assured Destruction) policies carried out for decades and multiple
"over-kill" stocks of anti-people "weapons" or mass murder
devices. - - J.Z., 1.2.03.)
Chesterton says:
" Never before has there been a betrayal at one and the same time so well
intentioned and so grievously damaging to our national interests as that which
has led to the Strasbourg Assembly."
It is Chesterton's
good right to assert and try to prove that the aims of the Strasbourg Assembly
damages Britain's interests. But he has no right to speak of betrayal.
Chesterton quotes
the words of Livy: "That State alone is free which rests on its own
strength and does not depend upon the will of another."
Livy is quite
right, but does Chesterton really believe that the British members of the
Strasbourg Assembly did not know - - I will not says old Livy - - but the truth
he stated ?
The members took
into consideration what Chesterton ignores (does he really ignore it? He seems
no blockhead) and that is:
England has 50
millions inhabitants (thanks to Malthus - - she could have 100 millions at
least) of whom a part sympathises with the Kremlin.
The Kremlin
commands 200 millions of Russians (J.Z.: and over 100 other ethnic groups, not
to speak of others! - J.Z.) (thanks to her anti-Malthusian mentality), 100
millions of Poles, Czechs, Romanians, Bulgarians etc. + 300 millions of Chinese
today and 500 millions tomorrow. In such a situation England is no more free. The
question is only to keep as much freedom
as possible in this situation. It may be that the Strasbourg program was
not the best to keep as much freedom as possible for every member of the to be
created anti- soviet organisation. But, certainly, it was a good start. Reform,
if necessary are possible, and if Chesterton will be so kind as to
propose such reforms, he certainly will be heard.
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v.
Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 14.9.1949. Your letter of 8.9. received yesterday.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
my letters to you in August were dated from: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
(5 bis), 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 17,
18, 19, 20, 22, 28, 29, those sent to
you in September: 3, 4, 5, 7. I forget to send the time to read
all that. Your letters were of 11.8., and 25.8.
In September I received the above-mentioned of 8.9. I confirmed the
receipt of your latter of 25.8. in my letters of 3.9., 4.9., and 5.9. I do hope that you received all of
them in the meantime.
----------------
I thank you very
much for your kindness in giving me an opportunity of publishing an article
about Malthusianism in "The Individualist". But you will have the
trouble to translate it from my pigeon-English into real English. I will try to
write the article as soon an possible."
(J.Z.: Why couldn't Meulen, as editor, simply have extracted
enough paragraphs from this extensive correspondence and edited it
sufficiently, to eliminate B.'s English mistakes? He would certainly have done
a better job of this than I have tried to offer with my "improvements".
- J.Z., 1.2.03.)
---------------
I share your
opinion that profit-sharing is to be rejected. Your reasons are quite right.
Profit-sharing is far less than an "Ersatz" for Cooperation, it is
bad in itself. Most workers refuse it and rightly so.
(J.Z.: B. and M., apparently, did not distinguish here
between "profit-sharing" as a result of the purchase of shares of the
enterprise and "profit-sharing" as either a gift or a compulsory
sharing of profits of an enterprise, nor between "profit-sharing" of
insignificant amounts of profits and of very significant ones. Experience has
shown, that from the moment that rightful incomes from profit-sharing, through
rightly acquired shares, exceeds ca. 20%
to 30 % of the income of a worker or clerk, then and only then
does their "employee-mentality" begin to disappear and they begin to
act rather as responsible partners or cooperators or co-owners or partners. -
J.Z., 1.2.03.)
You write:
"You may say that there is no hope of Free Banking before a Communist
Revolution makes slaves of us all."
My opinion is, that if Western Europe, too is
overwhelmed by a Communist Revolution, then the ideas of Free Banking will for
be forgotten many centuries, just like Aristarch's heliocentric system was
forgotten for centuries, when the economic interest of the priesthood seemed
endangered by this system.
On the contrary: I doubt whether the revolution can be
avoided if not at one place in the world, and may it be ever so small,
Free Banking is practised (or Mutual Banking - - which in my opinion does not essentially
differ from Free Banking). The world, and especially the workers, must see
what Free Banking can perform and interested parties must get the opportunity
to investigate the details of a Free Bank. If I would live in England, I would
try to start a Mutual Bank, which is - - as you found out - - permitted
by the English laws.
(Here, too, Meulen seems to have been misinformed! - J.Z.,
1.2.03.)
I would also try
induce unemployed to lease shut down firms. I would counsel them to pay the
rent with "purchasing certificates" such as:
"This ticket is taken for 5 shillings
at the shop XYZ if goods or services are paid with them."
I would also counsel them to pay with such tickets for their
victuals, clothing. etc.
In the first days
the tickets, of course, would be at a very considerable discount, and a ticket
of the nominal value of 5 s. would be accepted only as 3 s. or less. But once
people become aware that for these tickets goods can really be bought, which,
in other shops do cost 5 s. cash, then they would exert a demand for these
tickets and, after a week or so, the tickets would be bought for 4 s. 11 p. The
loss of the first week must be considered, by the workers (founders, rather? -
J.Z., 1.2.03.) as "first establishment costs", which every new
enterprise must bear.
There is - - of
course - - still something to be said about the provision of raw materials.
----------------
To English workers
applies the Spanish proverb:
"God gives almonds
to those who cannot crack them."
(The liberty of issuing purchasing certificates not
redeemable into gold being, in this case, the almond.)
----------------
The "Observer"
of 17.7.49. publishes an article which the paper "Die Brücke"
translates under the heading: "Das Recht zu streiken. "(The Right to
Strike"- J.Z.) ("Die Brücke" is the paper of the British
Information Centre and very well edited.) The "Observer" states: In
cases as the dispute of the dock-workers there is, socially, no right of
striking. On the other side: How to settle the dispute so, that both cases get
the impression: The settling was
just? The solution is simple: There is no right to strike.
But if it is necessary to dispossess the workers of the
right to strike, then there must be for a right for them to take over the shop
(or whatever it may be) as a co-operative.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Does Nature think???
Certainly it does not.
Does nature act in
many respects as if it thinks? Obviously! Better philosophers than I
have said here what one could say.
Is nature conscious
of the presence of man? Perhaps it is conscious, like we are of - - sit venia
verbo - - a flea,
even in deepest sleep. (Perhaps it is not - - what do we know!?)
In no case (or in almost no case) is nature conscious of individuals.
But it cares - - we do not know how - - for the race as all naturalists state.
Some of the blunders
of nature in creating men are:
1.) Nature did not endow man with the faculty that every ant
possesses: If there appear enemies of the race then ant attack the enemy
and does not care for its life. Every ant acts so and without hesitation. But
man does act so. If there appear Hitlers, Genghis Khans and such people, men do
not rush at him but behave as cowards. Baboons display much more courage. - Why
did not Nature equip man with as much courage as baboons possess? Their example
proves that it was in the power of Nature. That Nature failed here, I consider
as a blunder.
2.) Man's faculty to compare present evils with future
advantages is too feeble. Always man overestimates present evils or - - if
future evils are to be compared - - he underestimates these evils and
overestimates present goods or states. Also man's notion of probability is not
sufficient.
If people like
Hitler declare: I hang everybody who dares to speak about my person otherwise
than in expressions of highest
esteem, they will do so, even if they clearly see that the "leader"
will sacrifice much more than 3/4 of them for his purposes. Everybody thinks:
Oh - - there is still some possibility that I will be saved. I continue to
glorify my butcher. It would be easy to enumerate animals with a better
mentality, whose existence proves that such a mentality war not without the
limitations of Nature's Power. The lack of the right mentality
(which jackals possess ) is the true reason for which the
majority of men always lives under tyrants. That Nature did not endow man with that mentality, I
consider as a blunder of Nature.
(B. often used to say that even the usually so obedient dogs
tend to run away if they are frequently beaten. - J.Z., 2.2.03.)
There are still other blunders of Nature as it created men.
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed : U. v. Beckerath
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
15.9.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
yesterday I received the "New Generation", August
1949 edition, which you had announced in your letter of 8. 9. 49, the "National News-Letter of
25. 8.1949, "Truth" of
2.9.1949 and the "Economist" of 27. 8. 49. Thank you very much.
The Economist's
article "National Enterprise in Spain" is interesting. Remarkable the
tendency to transform State enterprises into private ones. It reminds me of the
same tendency in Tschiang Kai Shek's China, where also, not a principle led the
government but the simple fact that the officials, instead of producing goods,
produced nothing than corruption and deficits.
(J.Z.: There were, possibly, some happy exceptions. I heard
a story of an aircraft factory set up by Goering in Spandau, a suburb of
Berlin. It was well supplied with all the raw materials required and plans for
the planes, machines and skilled labour - and, nevertheless, did not produce a
single plane for the Nazis during the war. Instead, it supplied the black
market, e.g. with pots and pants. I do not know whether this was true or false.
Anyhow, Goering was sufficiently disliked for such stories to be gleefully
heard and passed on. - Naturally, Nazis would have classed this as corruption
and a great crime and loss, but others? - J.Z., 2.2.03.)
A rich man should
invite China's scholars to collect the known facts in Chinas history where
officials, endowed, with much power (not postmen and such people) did not
misuse their power but, on the contrary, governed well. For the best collection
- - indicating the sources from which the facts were drawn - - he should
promise a reward. I am convinced that the book so crowned would be a very small
volume.
At the time of the
emperors it was not unusual - - I read - - for the guilds to pay the
officials, sent from Peking,
so that they would not govern, but remain in their
Yamen, amuse themselves and smoke opium. This pension ceased with the first act
of administration fulfilled by the official. And then the guilds governed
themselves.
(J.Z.: If such officials were ever caught, they could have
excused themselves as having acted in the sense of Laotse's traditional
"Taoism", namely, by "non-action", or, as we would say now,
by a consistent "laissez faire" or hands-off policy to promote
progress and wealth. - J.Z., 2.2.03.)
The article
"Imports into the United States" deals with the American advice (to
England - J.Z.) to export more to Europe, to "fill the Dollar gap".
Free Traders, who conceived the last and best consequence of Free Trade,
present a much better advice:
1.) May the Americans puzzle their own brains in their own
affairs. They want export and know very well what unemployment means politically.
England is ready to admit exports from America. It is not England's worry to
care about the kind of payment.
2.) May the English decrees, as well as the American ones,
which compel the English to pay in Dollars be repealed. (Then the monopoly of
the Bank of England to provide the means of payment for external trade is to be
broken. No pity!)
3.) May England offer, as means of payment, English money
and purchasing certificates which are made good in commodities and services
(Milhaud System). Such certificates can also be drawn in Dollars,
provided an absolutely free market in Dollars exists.
This system having
been introduced, the next day a strong pressure group arises in the USA and
anywhere else, to reduce import duties as much as possible. Why? Simply so that
the value of English means of payments in
the hands of Americans may become as great as possible.
American consumers will join the American importers, and in some years - - I
estimate 20 or so - - American import duties will be abolished.
-----------------
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
16. 9.
1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the New Generation reproduced at page 59 an excellent
article of the Daily Telegraph of 1. 8. 49.
"In the July
issue of the County Clarion, the official organ of the Surrey Federation of
Labour Parties, Mr. Tom Braddock, M.P., writes: 'The workers of this country
have agreed that they want for themselves all that they produce, all the wealth
of the country, all the food, all the housing, all the clothing. Their
legitimate needs can only be satisfied by all; there is no surplus for the
cultured few, for the royal and noble few, for the wealthy few. All these must
be stripped of their rents, of their interest, of their profits and of their
inflated salaries and expense accounts.' "
The Daily
Telegraphs answer is very good. But something may be added:
1.) Braddock's standpoint is that of John Cade in
Shakespeare's "Henry Vl." It was never the point of view of
scientific socialism - - the word taken in its original sense, not in the sense
of "State socialism".
2.) In Russia - - with which Braddock seems to sympathise -
- brain work is highly esteemed and very well paid. Much can be said about the
Soviets which must diminish the sympathy for them in the world, but they are
not crazy. They have been able to learn from experience and still learn
from it every day. The West must not underestimate them. So the Soviet
theorists acknowledge labour whose exchange into goods is delayed (in
other
words: savings) as labour. It is, on principle, acknowledged,
that the share of that labour, in the products it helped produce, should
be just. Consequently, interest of Soviet savings institutions is surprisingly
high, now, at many institutions, 6 % p.a. or so, as I read. Some years ago it
was 10 % in some districts; where the yield of "saved" labour was
high enough to make such an interest possible.
The brain work of
factory managers in Russia, as many observers believe - - is better paid than
the corresponding income of factory owners in the West. Here one must take the
payment of an average worker as a measure, not the standard of living of the
managers, although this standard is now no longer far from great luxury.
But the Russian manager - - it is true - - cannot buy
diamonds, gold watches and such things. Also his lodging is not so well
equipped as an English lodging of an average employee. But the Russian manager
eats very well, sits every evening in excellent theatres and often works no
more than 10 months in a year.
3.) A mentality like that of Braddock can only arise under
the wage system. If the national labour would be organised in a cooperative
form, then brain labour would at once appear as what it is. A
cooperative, which does not engage good managers and, correspondingly pays them
well, loses a multiple of that what it saves by paying the manager like an
average "hand". Such experiences must be gained.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
17.9.1949. Your letter of 12. 9.
49, received today.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
I thank you very much for the clipping from the
"Times", headed: "Some technical terms in common use". I
will return it in two weeks or so and attach a German translation of the terms.
----------------------
Collective responsibility. If there should exist a logically and
philosophically well founded apology for this
principle, I am ready to accept it. Until now I found no apology;
everywhere it's validity is supposed as self- evident - - in the Bible (one
exception, 5 Mos. 24, 16). In the whole modern political literature of all
nations (very few authors excepted), and in daily talks of educated and of not
educated people. If the principle is morally well founded and its application
to the ci-devant subjects of Hitler is morally possible, then those, who oppose
the extermination of these subjects are still too moderate. He, who
really is an accomplice of a murderer, must be killed, as well as the murderer
himself.
If I should get a
book that defends the principle of collective responsibility, I will set aside
all other occupations and do nothing than to study the book. I would expect
from such a book inter alia:
1.) A clear definition of the notion "collective"
in its moral application.
Are only subjects of governments collectively responsible?
Does there also exist such a thing as a class
collective responsibility?
And how long must a man have been a subject of a government
or a member of a class or group, so that he must share the collective
responsibility?
Are the children collectively responsible? (Marat
said: Yes! and demanded the killing of Lewis XVI. children, "the young
wolves of tyranny".)
If not, at what age shall their collective responsibility
begin?
Class or group collective responsibility deserves
special attention. (Example, where ever experts of the principle were in doubt:
The subjects of the Saar territory asserted: We are not collectively
responsible. We were only governed for a few years by Hitler. It seems that
this standpoint is now internationally acknowledged, although the Saar elections
were for Hitler.)
You will remember
the trial of Tatiana Leontieff at Luzern, where she shot a Swiss
"bourgeois". (She was the daughter of a Russian general, if my bad
memory does not deceive me.) Tatiana was a student at a Swiss university and
adherent of a revolutionary group. Before the jury she declared: The man I shot
is here unimportant. I do not know him personally. But he is a member of the
ruling classes and insofar he shares the responsibility for the misery of the
proletariat. He did nothing to change its economic conditions. It was my
intention to show the proletariat what to do with its rulers. I do not care for
my life, worthless in such an economic order. In the canton Luzern capital
punishment is (or was) abolished. She was imprisoned for life. (She died, in
madness, in prison.)
A short time before or after, another young student, Sinaida
Konnopliennikowa, shot the Russian general Min, whom she accused of
being responsible for the military suppression of a strike.
But the most remarkable example for the application of the
principle of collective responsibility is, perhaps, the murder of the empress
Elisabeth of Austria, certainly one of the noblest women of her time. The
anarchist
Lucchesini, who stabbed her, declared at his trial, that he
knew nothing of the empress except her rank and name. But, he said, she is a
member of the ruling class and, therefore, deserves death. It is my intention,
he added, to give the proletarians an example. If every proletarian would do as
I did and kill the members of the ruling class that he can reach, then our
slavery would cease. He, too, declared that his life was worthless under the
present conditions.
There are many points
of view from which such actions must be condemned. One of these, for me
- - some decades ago and long before the first world war - - was my strong
opposition against the principle of collective responsibility - - so far spread
among men of all classes in the people and always considered as
self-evident.
Are you quite sure
that the mentality which produces the application of the principle to classes
or groups does not
exist among English proletarians and not only among proletarians???????
In any case, the adherents of the principle
should publish their opinion about the application of the principle to groups
or classes and should do so for their personal safety. It may be that
some new John Cade will be convinced that the principle is not applicable
to social groups but to subjects of governments only. (If that is the
meaning of the principle, which I shall learn from the book, which may exist,
but which I did not yet find, in which the principle is explained.) (As far as I remember, M. never discussed
that principle in those numbers of THE INDIVIDUALIST which I have seen and
read. - J.Z., 2.2.03.)
I do hope to find
in that book the explanation of a technique by which an unarmed group of
subjects is able to remove dictators or tyrants, whom those, who are armed, do
obey. Already Gibbon demonstrated that, in great States, it is
sufficient for the government to have an army of about 1 % of the population.
That was 150 years or more ago. With such an obedient army, says Gibbon, the
subjects are a defenceless prey of the government.
Today dictators arm, generally, more than 1% of the
population, although - - in the time of aeroplanes - - much less than 1 % would
be sufficient.
Or, if the author
does not know the effective technique, he will explain why even in the case
where the dictator is almighty, the subdued are collectively responsible for
his acts. That will be - - I think - - very difficult, but it may be that a David
Hume of the principle has already written the book, so that a logical and
philosophical reader must be converted by it if, before, he was an
opponent of the principle.
---------------
You say: "Had
enough Germans been outraged by his anti-Semitism, they could have prevented
his coming to
power."
Perhaps your are right. But if the army (or the
leaders, whom the army obeys) places its arms at the disposal of the dictator,
then the dictator is able to subdue 99 % of the population by an army
consisting of 1 %. Adam Smith says the same in the 4th book
of his "The Wealth of Nations". There Adam Smith explains that a
population without a militia will at last be the slave of its
government, which is not the least of the many truths revealed by Adam Smith.
America's liberty
reposes on her militia, presently more than 15 million of men. The arms
of every man are ready in the militia-regiment's armoury and, in the case of
political danger, in less than two hours several millions of resolute and well
armed men are ready to oppose every dictatorship.
(J.Z.: Alas, American governments have recognized this
danger for them long ago - and have thus placed the militia and its training
and armament and motivation under their own controls! Thus they have little
awareness of their individual rights and liberties and of how dictatorial their
"democratic" and "republican" governments have already become.
- J.Z., 2.2.03.)
You say: "The
Germans acquiesced it, and I think they must all share the blame."
If you would have said: "Those Germans, who acquiesced
it etc.", then I would agree, but here we are again on the principle of
collective responsibility and its ramifications.
Do the adherents of
the principle of collective responsibility also condemn the Russians for
the acts of the Kremlin and Spaniards for the acts of Franco (not to speak of
Tschiang Kai Shek's atrocities, which perhaps exceed those of the Nazis and for
which the world, until now, did not hold his unfortunate subjects
responsible?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dismantling. You say: "… is quite certain that
what punishment is being imposed on Germany, for the terrific suffering that
Hitler brought on Europe, is a form of Christian brotherly love compared with
what Hitler would have done to us."
I quite agree and sans reserve.
You add: " ...
with the full approval, I am sure, of the majority of Germans, had he
won the war."
Here I must say: Probably you are also right here.
The English were represented as a nation of monsters and very
many Germans firmly believed that they lived, essentially,
from the money they extorted from India etc. But I am not quite sure.
It was my intention
to show merely the political consequence of the continued dismantling,
so as Machiavelli would - - I think - - have done. That has nothing, to do with
revenge or forgiveness or morality or punishment or rewards.
Ethics. It seems, you take me for a Christian.
Oh, oh!!! Why??? I think it probable
that the proper doctrines of Christ are lost and that the four evangelists - -
did not quite understand him. In the gospel of St. John there are several
passages where Christ's answers have nothing to do with what he was asked.
Obviously, the passages were simply cut from the copy whose text became the
official one and the so mutilated copy was again copied. I cannot be an
adherent of a man, whose doctrines are so incompletely conserved as those of
Christ. But I do esteem his personality and there are reports enough - - I
think - - to justify my esteem and that of others.
Many think that
Christ distinguished between people simply sympathising with him and his
disciples. Prescriptions as about the "other cheek" were probably
meant only for the disciples.
You also take me
for an altruist. The contrary of egoism (the word taken in its popular sense)
is not simply altruism. Several isms may be the contrary to egoism.
But I am a 90 % Kantian.
Kant's doctrines are very difficult to understand. To those, who want to learn
the essentials in a few minutes, I recommend Louse Saxe Eby's "The Quest
for Moral Law", Columbia University Press, New York, 1944, page 136 - 159,
to be read in less than one hour. It's excellent.
I do admit that
altruism is (inter alia) a pleasure, if not exaggerated.
In my former
letters, I spoke less of altruism as of the sense of duty, which does not
always lead to pleasure, the word taken in its usual sense.
But here you are
right and your sentence is important enough: "If everybody were strong
enough to do what he thought was right, even though it would lead to his death,
living in society would be impossible, since society has no stronger deterrent
to actions, that it thinks to be wrong, than death." Very true! But:
1.) Society (that is a mass of average men) seldom
knows what is right;
2.) Society should give men, who do not wish to live in it,
an opportunity to live in monasteries, as in the Middle Ages, or today in the
Buddhist East, or to live in solitude as in old times the monks in Egypt. Also,
society should give men who think that life, both in society or without, is not
worthwhile, an opportunity to end their lives by hunger, so as it is in Tibet
and in many parts of India.
(J.Z.: Here he did not mention exterritorially autonomous
communities of volunteers as an alternative lifestyle option to which all
individuals are entitled, as a basic right and liberty, which begins to be
realized by the right of individuals to secede and thus to assert their
individual sovereignty. How they combine that individual sovereignty with that
of other volunteers should be quite up to them. - J.Z., 2.2.03.)
3.) Of 100 men, who think that they know what is right and wish
to live correspondingly, there is hardly one who is likely to sacrifice merely
a few shillings to get the possibility to do so. The market-quotation of rights
is low.
But the Roman
officials reproach towards the Christians was exactly like yours: Men, who do
not fear death in any situation, cannot be governed.
If the State claims
to govern all men, also those, whose pleasure it is by no means to be
governed (always a very small minority) and who propose practical possibilities
to "ignore the State" (Herbert Spencer, "Social Statics",
first edition and some later editions, chapter XIX.), then the State
must bear the consequences and may, by experience come to learn that it
is not almighty.
Lao Tse, in
the "Tao Te King" says too: "If people do not take death as an
important thing, social life ceases."
-----------------
Cooperation. You say: "I do not believe ... that any
business that is run by a committee, can, on the average, be as efficiently
run, or with as much initiative and enterprise as that run by a private
employer, who makes his own decisions ... ".
I agree. But in Germany the cooperatives are very seldom
guided by committees. They have a manager and it is a general complaint that
these managers exercise more power than owners of concerns. (Sometimes
exaggerated, but by no means always, as I know from personal experience in
Hamburg.) What you say of initiative is very true. But I think (or more
exactly spoken: I hope) that within a society organised, essentially, in
cooperatives, there still will be employers, the word taken in its present
sense. If the employer pays his employees a little more than they earn in cooperatives
- - which will be no difficulty for him and will be rewarded for higher efforts
by the employed - - then there will be
no resentment against such an employer. Even in Russia private employment is
not quite abolished. But it is taxed very severely. Nevertheless, there are
people who find means to pay the taxes, to pay their employees very well and
still win enough for themselves. The present wage system must lead to a
social revolution, even if employers are resolved to take less than an average
employee. Under the wage system the employee must feel to be
exploited. It should be the task of social reformers to discard arrangements
that cause such feelings.
------------------------
Free Banking and
social justice. We agree that Free Banking will more and more reduce unduly
high profits of employers and bring wages to an economically justified level.
Yes - - in Germany,
too - - workers are not likely to become more than wage-earners (soon. - J.Z.).
The resistance to "cooperative-socialism" is greater among the
workers than by the government or employers. Nevertheless, a sufficiently great
number of cooperatives must be established to enable the workers to make comparisons.
If they find, that employees do not earn less than members of cooperatives do,
then their present mentality: "We are exploited!" will disappear and
the John Cades will become comic figures. They are not under the present
system. (And if they should find that, in most cases, they could earn more as
cooperators, then they will become receptive for proposals on such
transformations. - J.Z., 3.2.03.)
-----------------------
Gold Standard in
Germany in 1932. If in the year 1913
a shopkeeper would have declared: This commodity costs x marks in paper and x -
y marks in gold coins, everybody would have brought him gold coins and thought:
Such a sheep!! But if the shopkeeper would have done the same in the year 1932,
under Bruening, he probably would have been imprisoned and his shop closed; in
every case the discrimination would have been immediately stopped. Can that
possibly be a country which is really on a gold-standard, the latter
word taken in the sense of 1913??????
----------------------
The Colour Bar. The coloured are now considered as a competition
for the white. Under a system of Free Banking or Mutual Banking the coloured
would not any more be a competition (or considered as such - J.Z.,
3.2.03.). The whole aspect of the question would be quite changed. I am
convinced, that under a system, which knows no "exclusive currency",
the coloured's mind and behaviour will display quite unexpected acts, works and
successes.
The sculptures
found in the jungles of Cambodia are not inferior to the best Greek sculptures
and the few inscriptions found let us assume a very high standard of
literature.
Old Egypt's culture
seems to have been a Negro culture.
------------------------
The Babylonian god Beelzebub
was a reality insofar as the priests had the power to achieve the death of
anybody who did not believe in his existence. This put aside, he was a product
of the imagination.
What are nations
- - the modern gods????
In
"Truth" of 2.9.49, I find an article "Racial Origins" (page
258), by A. R. Davis (Lt.-Col., Ret.). He speaks of the new or old
"nations" in Scotland, Wales and Cornwall. Quite rightly he says:
"Today every evil force, from every
direction, is concentrated on the destruction of England." But there is
only one help: Resolutely turning away from the old ideology of (territorial -
J.Z., 3.2.02.) nationalism, together with nation-wide collective responsibility
and replace it by - - well, by what?? You know my opinion.
-----------------
Latin word
"Veni". The German
pronunciation of the "V" is
like the English V. Only in words of German origin is the V pronounced like F.
Some uneducated Germans (not all) pronounce the V in "Vagabond" (=
tramp), "Vampire", "Vanilla", "Vaseline", Violin",
"vivat" like F because they do not know that these words are not of
German origin.
-----------------
In one of my next
letters I hope to say something about the very interesting articles in
"Truth", "Economist" and others.
Many good
observations about the German elections.
I am a sympathiser of Proudhon's "Principe
fédératif" and regret that there has been created a central power with so
many rights, including the rights to inflate and deflate, also to devaluate.
In the article
"Currency Unions" (Ec. 20.8.49.), the author takes it as
self-evident, that there must be a power to make the paper money a legal
tender. But that is not so self-evident. On the contrary. He takes it also as
self-evident, that wars are impossible without the issue of additional legal
tender paper money. There he is very much in error. (Not regarding unpopular
and prolonged aggressive wars! - J.Z., 3.2.03.) He takes it also as
self-evident, that a "full employment policy" requires such an
additional issue. Great error!
----------------
Very
Faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
30.9.1949. Your letter of 27. 9. 49, received today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I hope to answer more fully next week than today.
I could hardly get
any worse news than that your health suffered another setback.
My impression is: Two
men in a boat and looking out for land. One of the two gets seriously sick. The
boat (our "movement") wants help not less than the sick man.
-------------------
That there are
intimate connections between stomach and brain is certain. I thought that these
connections were performed by the nerve that is, in German, called nervus
sympathicus, but it may be that the connection between stomach and the thalamus
is not less close. When I was a child of about 10 years, I saw a brick dropping
and hurting a mason, who was wounded and bleeding. I felt a violent attack in
my stomach. I still see before me the mason and his comrades, who came at once
from the new building to him.
The procedure with
the sheep thalamus seems to be unknown in Germany. I will communicate it to a
physician I know.
To the numerous
advice that you will now receive, let me contribute one: You should less read
and write more. What average economists (Marx calls them
"Vulgär-Ökonomisten") and politicians write is not so important, is
also very quickly forgotten. What you have to say is much more important
and will also not be so quickly forgotten, at least not by others than average
readers. Also writing corresponds more to your nature than reading, which - - I
think - - has for you no other value than to give you occasions to write.
It is an old observation that writing reduces the "vita propria" of
the cells and compels them to subordinate their vita propria to the vita
cerebralis, which - - I think - - is the real human vita.
(J.Z.: Reading about one disaster, stupidity and prejudice
after the other can make you desperate, hopeless and resigned. It puts you
down. It is depressing and stresses you, day after day. I have long given up
reading the dailies regularly or listening to all the radio and TV news. So very rarely something positive and right
is found there. Writing down and permanently recording and duplicating, at
least in affordable alternative media, the best ideas that you encountered
about alternative actions and possibilities, gives you at least some hope and
strength that all your thoughts, opinions, ideas and efforts might not be quite
in vain, although not read or heard by others, immediately, and will, at least,
be on record and, some day, retrieved by those able and willing to make some
use of them. B. had mostly no other means available than his typewriter, with
which he could make a few carbon copies of his correspondence. - J.Z., 3.2.03.)
You say, it is a pleasure to lie in bed - - for you
it is a duty!!! Don't get up too soon!
For a year or so in
Berlin a new kind of fountain pen is sold, which in German is called a (ball point pen). It is filled with ink paste
instead of with ink. (B. here actually wrote "powder" instead of paste.
Later he corrected himself and wrote "cream" instead, which I changed
into "paste". - J.Z., 3.2.03.) It is easy to make copies with that
"Kugelschreiber". For sick people it is excellent because it avoids
stains, and yet offers all advantages of fountain pens. I use a carbon paper to
make copies.
---------------------
I return here -
enclosed - the cutting from the "Telegraph" of 26.9.: "If
Devaluation is to succeed." Since you
have written at note to it in "The Individualist", it may be
desirable for you to have the article.
Johnstone says:
"In the second place, what is mean by "freeing the pound?" Does
it mean, for example, freedom for British tourists abroad to spend what they
like; or for British investors to buy and sell in Wall Street ad libitum? If so, it means freedom for the pound to
commit suicide". J. is very much
mistaken. If today British tourists would spend in Switzerland, in the USA, in
Sweden, etc. 100 millions of Pounds (in notes of the Bank of England), what
could the new owners do with these Pounds? They can do nothing else with them -
- whether they are friends or
enemies - - than use them, as means of payment vis-à-vis England. A few
days later, these Pounds would have returned to England and would there buy
anything. And one may be sure, that the owners, or those people, who bought
them from the owners, will find something worth buying, although
economists prove exactly and irrefutably that there is no possibility to
buy in England, because all is much too dear. They find out the right
commodities. (Especially, if the exchange rate is free and a strong outflow of
Pounds has, seemingly, turned the exchange rate "against" England,
i.e., made Pounds and thereby English goods cheap for foreigners to buy. -
J.Z., 3.2.03.)
4 weeks later an additional export 100 millions L is
recorded by the statistics. (To speak more exactly: recorded are perhaps
only 50 millions. The exporters are not so stupid as to reveal to people, whose
intentions they know, the true value of what they export.) But these
things you will know at least as well as I know them.)
Spending English
money abroad or letting imports come in, quite freely, enforces an
export of same amount, if the importers accept British money. (Zander gave a lecture,
held at Geneva about this theme. He will tell you if you phone him.)
State socialists will reply that if such freedom will be
admitted, then the British Government's exchange control system will be
overrun. I say: One of both must die, Britain or her exchange control system,
however good that system may be. (Read the Archarnians of old
Aristophanes. If the Acharnians were to choose between their baskets or
their existence, they were not able to sacrifice their baskets.)
Johnstone speaks of
the "excessive costs of living in England." Let him estimate the
costs in gold, sold at a free
bullion market. (1 ounce = 60 paper dollars, if sold in small quantities, 100
ounces in a tin = 40 dollars.).
-----------------------
You will have read
in your papers that the atomic explosion in Russia meant the blowing-up of the town
where the bombs were fabricated. In Berlin they say: If the Russian bombs would
really exist, the Russians would never have admitted that one of the bombs exploded. Butt if they would have contested the
explosion, then the situation would be dangerous.
-----------------------
I return here the
text of "Notes from Berlin" with your comment.
I could accept the
text if you would replace the three words
"…
for their purchases." (line 6 from the bottom) by
" … their
taxes".
I am convinced that
for all other purposes the customers of the Mutual Bank will accept the notes
(or certificates - - if one prefers this name) of the Bank.
The Bank could be
started by a single merchant as well as by a co-operative. I spoke of a Mutual
Bank because I do not expect that a merchant will have courage enough to start
a bank on W. B. Greene's principles.
I do not believe that W. B. Greene (or Tucker, his adherent)
would consider the mutual form as essential. Stephen Pearl Andrews (Instead of a
Book, page 276) in his treatise about "The Science of Society" - - I
had only a German translation - - burnt - - ) considered only the case where a merchant
(in a little town or village) began the system. He had the practice on his
side. Then, i.e., before the pernicious American law of 1863 many merchants - -
- without knowing Andrews - - issued notes, redeemable only in their good or
services.
During the great inflation in the years 1921 - 1923 (While
it became rapid. It began, I believe, with WW I. - J.Z., 3.2.03.) a Berlin
firm, Meinl, originally from Vienna, issued also irredeemable certificates,
accepted as money in the shops of Meinl. The success was excellent. Meinl paid
all its expenses in these certificates, which
were well accepted everywhere.
So much for today
and in haste.
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 1.
X. 1949. Your letter of 27. IX.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
that in England there has been n o unemployment for a long
time is an astonishing thing. Quite frankly: I do not find an explanation. In
general, "dirigism" (a good new word, which the French invented)
increases unemployment, although the increase may not appear in unemployment
statistics. Example: When Mussolini began to govern, he placed the unemployed
into his Black-Shirt-Army and let them march throughout the country.
Statistically, unemployment disappeared at once. Economically it was as large
as before. In Germany it was about the same. Hitler said: You unemployed: Make
guns and other war materials, and they did.
(J.Z.: Sales of that product to the government was assured
and the government could pay for this product, even if it merely used the note
printing presses to produce fiat money. A large stock of unsold consumer goods
and services was available and it could be thus "invested". Prices
were depressed through deflation and additional fiat money, at first, merely
helped to restore as normal prices as one can achieve under normal despotism,
i.e. prices normal for it. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
But in England, obviously, the high degree of employment is
due neither to artifices as those of Mussolini nor to increasing armament
(which may contribute a little) but to other causes.
But, certainly, the
high degree of employment is in some connection with the relatively low
standard of life in England. The standard is - - it seems - - not lower than it
was before the war, also its costs - - counted in gold - - are not - - I think
- - higher. But the productivity of labour is increased. That increase,
together with the high degree of employment, should, under normal conditions,
increase the standard of living and in this case very considerably. It does
not. Why?
(J.Z.: Later in "The Individualist" M. brought
some figures which indicated that the increased productivity since about 1900
had been taxed away and turned into welfare State services to the bureaucracy
and its favourites, those supposedly helped by welfarism. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
------------------
Collective
responsibility. Your example with the ten men is confirmed by history in a
remarkable case, which Franklin reports in his memories. Many of the Mennonites
of his time would not fight against the Indians, although they had begun a
war with the honest intention to exterminate the whites and their warfare was
the usual Indian one. The Mennonites were no cowards but their religion held
them back. Their mentality changed completely and quickly when they did not
only hear about the Indians, but saw the burnt villages and the
remnants of tortured men. Then they fought as all others did.
I agree with you: War
does creates moments which do not admit a satisfactory solution of the
problem.
Let me report some
experiences with collective responsibility from the last war and due to the
German army on one side and the Balkan volunteers on the other. It was a simple
matter for the volunteers to compel a village to join the volunteers. They
captured a German soldier, killed him, mutilated the corpse and announced it to
the military police. At the same time, they said to the peasants: The German
police is informed - - you know what will happen now. Join our companies and do
so very quickly. What could the peasants do? They had to choose between the
burning of the village by Germans, the shooting of all men, the abduction of
the rest of the inhabitants - - on the
one side - - and
joining the partisans on the other side. Of course, they did the latter, which,
which still offered some chance to keep alive many of the inhabitants. In less
than an hour the villagers left their homes and retreated into the forests.
When the Germans
came, they applied the rules of collective responsibility for the killing of
the soldier to the houses and those inhabitants who had not fled quickly
enough.
This method of the
partisans became, at last and of course known to the German officers and they
well realised that the application of the principle of collective
responsibility had no other effect than to strengthen the partisans. But the
average soldier, when he saw the dead and mutilated comrade before him,
demanded that "something must be done". If the officers would not
have shot some civilians, then the soldiers would have done it themselves and
the officers would have lost all confidence of their men and would no longer be
obeyed in actions. Sometimes, it was possible to save the village from being
burnt by saying to the soldiers: The houses must be spared. They are quarters
for our comrades behind us. - - I heard all that from several persons, who were
all engaged in the Balkan campaigns.
The experience of all wars teaches that similar things
happen in every war on every side.
In the war of 1870/71 - - where the role of the
"Franc-tireurs" was considerable - - Moltke ordered, that the real
murderers should be found out and that, if they could at all be found out, then
the inhabitants of the district must pay a very high contribution. The greatest
part of the contribution was distributed at the battalion or regiment to which
the murdered soldier belonged. That simple means soothed the fury of the
comrades and made it possible to spare many towns and villages which,
otherwise, would have been destroyed. It was the least of the possible evils.
(Moltke was a human character and tried to diminish, as much
as possible, the atrocities of war. He strongly opposed the bombardment of
Paris and declared: It the many thousands of shells, that will now shoot,
indiscriminately, into Paris, were all are directed to one point, then
we would make a breach to the enceinte (walls? - J.Z.) and perhaps get Paris in
a few days. But Bismarck and his followers thought, that they knew better and
convinced King William.)
But the inevitable
arising of the practice of the principle of collective responsibility (J.Z.:
Inevitable is this practice only as long as these wrong ideas, premises and
definitions remain unruffled in all too many heads! - J.Z., 4.2.03.) and in
every war or civil war, has nothing to do with the critics of philosophy.
Philosophy cannot help but confirm the standpoint of Duprat, whom I
quoted in one of my last letters. (5.9.49. - J.Z.)
-------------------
Certainly, a great
number of Germans voted for Hitler in the years 1932 and 1933. They were asses.
But to say: Those, who did not vote for Hitler, or who, after they had
voted for him, noticed what simpletons they had been, were outvoted and
overwhelmed and, therefore, are not any less guilty than if they had,
still 1945, voted for Hitler - - this standpoint seems to require philosophy's
justification and, certainly, is far from being self-evident.
(J.Z.: Other false assumptions were: 1.) These elections
were "honest elections", which they were not. 2.) It would have been
easy for dissenting Germans to resist and overthrow the regime. 3.) That this
could be done without arms, military organisation and training and 4.) That the
means of protest and enlightenment still existing in genuine democracies would
have been at their disposal. Already during the Weimar Republic the armed gangs
or communists and Nazis largely ruled the streets and public meetings. -
Moreover, up to 8 million unemployed and their family members and friends did
believe the promises of Hitler that he could provide them with employment,
while under the Weimar Republic Germany's greatest inflation and greatest deflation
ever happened and was ascribed to the "weak" leaders of this
Republic, rather than to the same ignorance on monetary and financial matters
which characterised all governments. When I came to Australia, in 1959
the "leadership principle" was still more popular here then it was in
Germany when I left. It still prevails. At most the voters want other leaders!
Ever hopefully, voters vote in a new political machine and its leader, no
matter how often they were disappointed by all previous ones. And the journalists
are more interested in leadership struggles than in the "ideas" of
the "leaders". - Once a dictator has established his power, he is not
easily shifted out of it, even if the majority of his subjects feels rather
like his victims than his followers. Have libertarians so far offered and
published a good enough programme for an easy and truly liberating and
peace-promoting libertarian revolution? Do they believe that non-libertarians
are more enlightened on this subject than they are themselves? Where is the
evidence for this in their present peace-movement on the occasion of the
planned war "against Iraq", rather than a police action against its
dictator, Saddam Hussein, and his secret mass murder weapons stores only? I
have still to hear a clear-cut and attractive war-aims, peace-aims and
liberation programme in this case. Ignorance and prejudices, including
collective responsibility notions, continue on both sides, at all levels, among
all the ideologues. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
If Heaven
would apply to humanity the principle of collective responsibility (he does -
- if the Bible is right), that is:
Punish the subjects for the actions of their government or the whole of a
county for the actions of a part of it (majority or minority) then, for many centuries
not a single human being would have existed.
---------------------
The technique
for opposing a tyrannical government is an important thing. Until now such a
technique has not
been invented. (Did anyone come closer to it than I did in
my two peace books? - J.Z. 4.2.03.) The tyrannical governments in the 17th to 20th centuries have been
overthrown
1.) by
"palace-revolutions", including such an the 27th of
Thermidor (1794),
2.) by wars, as the
government of Napoleon I and Hitler,
3.) by the timely
death of the government's chief, as in the case of Cromwell. (Nobody can deny
his greatness;
but as Roscher
explains, Cromwell's financial policy was so bad or unsuccessful that he
stood, immediately.
before the
same situation as Louis VVI did, 140 years later. But his good luck let him die
in high glory.
4.) By voluntary
concessions of the chief, whose intention was to rule and not enforce
his opinion on every trifle.
Such cases
were the great administrative reforms by Queen Elizabeth and the reforms by
Napoleon III (a ruler
and man often
underestimated, in the last years of his reign.
Investigations
about the subject are difficult because to-day some governments are considered
as quite tolerable, which at their time seemed to be the summit of tyranny, as
those of 1789, 1830, 1848 and some others, perhaps Tsarism not excluded.
The subjects of modern Totalitarianism would gladly change
with the French of 1789 or the Prussians of 1848. David Hume taught, for
instance, that a government like that of Louis XIV. was certainly better and
granted more real freedom
than that of Athens or Rome at their "best" time.
As long as the
technique of overcoming tyrannical governments is not yet invented or not in
the power of the subdued, there can be no moral responsibility of subjects for
acts of their government. The world recognises this simple truth in the case of
modern Russia, Czechoslovakia, Spain and others. (Not by its "nuclear
strength" policy! - J.Z., 4.2.03.) Why not in all cases?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
But that man in
general - - from China to South-America and from Moscow to Calcutta - -
displays always the same degree of weakness against anyone, who likes to subdue
him, does prove to me that nature neglected him -when he was only half
finished. And, insofar, I consider him as a blunder of nature. The capacity to
revolt and to find out the best means to revolt is, for men, no less important
than the capacity to make nice poems, ice-cream, music, aeroplanes and radios.
But nature equipped him only with the capacity of obedience.
(J.Z.: On other occasions he pointed out, that we were,
largely, bred by slaves. Rebellious spirits were almost automatically
exterminated, for a very long time, and thus had far less offspring. At the
same time, the masters, by their numerous legal or illegal children, spread
their domineering spirit widely enough to make the persistence of this negative
selection process possible for a long time. We have to thank the institution of
territorial governments for this kind of negative evolutionary process, which
still leaves most people as life-long statists. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
-------------------
Ethics. I understand well that many people do not
believe in the existence of a man named Christ, of whom so many miracles and
other incredible things are reported. But there were also reported some details
which were certainly neither invented nor derived from star-movements nor from
the older mythology. Such details are, inter alia:
1.) His relations to his family were bad. The family tried
to arrest him and confine him for madness. Markus 3, verse 21.)
2.) He never recommended good relations to family members,
except in case the members were of the same religious opinion (the word
"religion" taken in a moral sense. He even recommended separation
from one's family for religious reasons. (According to the wife of Prof.
Rittershausen, B. once felt even compelled to conduct a court case against his
own father. I do not know his reasons for this. To my knowledge, he engaged in
correspondence only with one surviving family member, Erich von Beckerath, who
was an economist of the conventional statist type. - So he had, possibly, his
own personal reasons for sympathising with J.C. in this respect. - J.Z.,
4.3.02.
There are many passages in the Evangiles, inter alia, Matth.
19, 29. Jesus went so far as to demand,
that a man should not hesitate to follow him and leave his father
unburied.(Math. 8, 21.)
3.) In Ev. John 7, 10, is reported a detail where he seems
to have simply not spoken the truth, with the intention to deceive his
brethren. The passage is not quite clear in this respect, but
Schopenhauer's conjecture, that he did not speak the truth, seems pretty well
founded. His bad relations to hid brethren are also reported in this chapter.
(Verse 7.)
I could add very
many other details which make it very probable that Jesus was neither an
invention nor a myth, but a man
like you and I and even - - as far as I am discern - - with a much better
character and more courage to express his opinions, even vis-à-vis death.
The somewhat dark
passage, John 3, 18, I interpret thus:
He who does not
share this spirit of truth and confessing recognised truths (John, 14,17) is in
his own opinion a contemptible being, so that he feels himself judged.
But truth and love
of it do not depend on the Evangelists and their reports. Our own reason leads
to them, if connected with a character who does not, at every occasion,
deliberate: Does it pay???
From Buddha still
more miracles or impossibilities are reported than from Christ. Also, there are
great contradictions in his doctrines (which I am inclined to ascribe to an
improvement in Buddha's views in the last period of his life), much as the
doctrine, that there are former existences for every being and the other
doctrine that the thing, which everybody calls "I " (self), does not
exist but is an innate error". Many, therefore, have believed that the
whole story of Buddha was a myth. But in the year 1898 a scholar by the name of
W. C. Peppé found, at Piprava, in the district Tarai, a grave with inscriptions
in the Maghadi-language and in old Brahmi-Letters, from which it became
certain, that it was the grave of Buddha. (R. Pischel, "Leben und Lehre
des Buddha", Leipzig-Berlin, 1921, Editor Teubner.)
(The sphere of religions is so full of lies and deceptions,
especially on its founders, and to the financial advantage of the priesthood,
monks and nuns, that I take this information with a great deal of
"salt". - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
The true
teachings or Christ - - of course - - were in contradiction to the doctrines of
the churches, and most sects. It is my opinion - - but here I may be in the
wrong - - that before Kant explained the matter in his book about
religion the true teachings of Christ were unknown. Also, I am convinced that
the greatest part of his teachings
is lost, probably during the persecutions under Diocletian, Decius and
others; the Evangiles were written by people who did not understand the main
point. That there are great differences in the opinions of the Evangelists is
clear by the fact, that the word father, in the sense of "father in
heaven", is relatively seldom used by Markus and Luke (about a dozen times) but very often by
Matthäus and John. (A fact which I discovered a short time ago.)
The Christian
ethics is represented in a new and interesting manner - - quite impartially - -
I think - - by Louise Saxe Eby, in "The Quest for Moral Law", a book
which I mentioned sometimes in my letters. The chapter "Jesus and the
Jewish-Christian Ethical Heritage" (pages 73-92) is interesting and
remarkable.
I held - - quite
like you - - the Chinese Ethics in high esteem. I possessed Kong Fu Tse, Lao
Tse, Meng Tse and some others. One of the best elements of Chinese Ethics is
that it recognises the people's right to chase tyrants. (Chastise? kill?
execute? - J.Z., 4.2.03.) For a reason I do not know, the influence of the
Chinese Ethics on practical life is trifling.
From Islamic Ethics
I accepted - - before I had read the Koran - - the abstaining from "all
what makes drunk". In my 18th year I became an abstainer. Today
I feel a real aversion towards wine, beer, etc. Concerning the rest of Islamic Ethics I am, probably,
not enough instructed to judge about it. My impression (which may be wrong) was
that it looses itself in details and is not enough elevated to general
principles.
Your remark about
the Ethic of Epikuros is probably well founded, although a rascal like
the emperor Konstantine (and his successors) would have misused Epikuros not
less than he did with Christ's Ethics. Kant, who calls Epikuros a noble
heart, says - - and certainly with justification - - that such an ethics is
open to many misunderstandings. I agree with him and for that reason I
am glad, that Konstantine did not accept it. It would have been - - I think - -
a "pearl thrown to a swine".
(J.Z.: Are the other religions really less liable to be
misunderstood and misinterpreted? The sheer number of them, ca. 7,000 to 8,000,
speaks against this. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
----------------------
Spencer. Perhaps your opinion about chapter XIX of
"Social Statics" would be more favourable if, in the year 1914 or in
the year 1939 some millions of German soldiers would have declared: It is our
right to ignore that State and he, who wants to compel us to fight in
his battles - - may he come on! I think it is not improbable that in 100 years
or so some millions of German soldiers will really take this stand.
(J.Z.: For me that chapter is something like an intelligence
test: Whoever fails to see its logic and its implications does not pass that
intelligence test. He is not intelligent enough to realize the possibilities of
the new and exterritorialist politics, which is, in many respects, the opposite
of territorial politics. - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
Cooperation. If you found in 1931 by personal
inspection that in this year it was prohibited in Russia to employ others, then
it probably will still be so. My information was from the year 1928.
Gold standard.
Your remark is true.
English payments in Sterling to USA and others. Compelling
the English to use Dollars for the payment of imports is applying the principle of exclusive
currency to England's external trade. Greene said more and better, what
there is to say about this principle, than I can. But I would understand and
agree if the New York exporters would demand a Dollar-Basis for the
means of payment for cotton, wheat etc. The certificates, bills of exchange,
etc. would then contain the passage:
"We, the firm
XYZ, accept in our business this bill as we would accept the amount of ....
Cash-Dollars."
The sound working of such a clause provides an absolutely
free exchange market and the abolition of every kind of government control of
it. Such bills, as are here hinted at, return to England as well as Sterling
Notes of the Bank of England and can buy, indirectly, anything in England. They
would be much less likely to be hoarded, in a foreign central bank, as
"foreign exchange". - J.Z., 4.2.03.) Every import, paid with such
bills, enforces an export of the same amount. Every import paid with
Dollars of American origin, diminishes England's purchasing power. (Only
if it confines itself to buying for imports only with US dollars! - J.Z.,
4.3.03.) Dollars of American origin are now only at the disposition of the Bank
of England, and, insofar, are a monopoly of that Bank, as far as English
subjects are concerned. Dollar-bills of English origin can by signed by every
fruit dealer - without any help from the Bank of England. That, very probably,
will be (given as a - J.Z., 4.2.03.) reason for which such bills will be
prohibited.
(The monopoly of the Central Banks, now in all
legislation, is the most important paragraph. I regret that I am not able to
procure the text of the English and the American exchange regulations. If I
could, I would be able to tell you: That and that paragraph is it.
Cataract. Whether
bathing the eyes in hot water is good, I cannot say. My own impression
is that water of about 55 degrees F. is best. Schopenhauer recommends, to open
the eyes under (cold) water. He did so and his eyes were those of a lynx during
his whole life. I tried to do the same, but it felt disagreeable to me and
since that time I prefer to close the eyes when bathing them.
A suitable diet is - - and here I agree with many physicians
- - of the greatest influence. In Berlin, and for some month now, sugar, flour,
oats and fruits (tomatoes, too) are sold freely. I use the good opportunity and
my eyes improved surprisingly. In May I earnestly feared to become blind, at
least on the right eye.
Observer-Article. I beg to delay my
answer to one of my next letters. At the moment my free time is very short.
Hitler and his voters. My impression is, that the German army's
role is quite unknown abroad, also that of Hindenburg, the old traitor. In one
of my next letters I beg to say some words about them.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
2. X. 1949. Your letter of
27.9.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
there is a "school" of scientists, which still
distinguishes - - as Aristotle did - -
the "dominant" of an organism and its
"sub-dominants". Aristotle called the Dominant "Entelechy".
A German botanist, Reinke (who still lived in 1900), invented the name
"Dominant" (in this connection - J.Z.), which now has been accepted
by several others; I think the term is well chosen.
Dominants may be or
become sub-dominants and vice versa. Example: There is a Dominant in nature
which men call worm. Very many other Dominants use this worm-Dominant as
their "servant" and the bowels of animals and men are a system
of worms dominated by the superior force of nature: Dog, bird, man or whatever
it may be. So
the "Dominant" worm is a "sub-Dominant"
of all animals which nature gifted with bowels.
All Dominants, used
by other organisms as sub-Dominants, tend restore their original independence. Sickness
is nothing but a victory of a sub-Dominant over its Dominant, and healing is
restoring the Domination.
(Nature does not favour - - as it seems - - anarchism. It
should read the writings of Tucker.) This restoring appears as "vis
medicatrix", and it in the matter of medicine to help the vis medicatrix
and remove its obstacles.
In Kant's and
Schopenhauer's philosophy the doctrine of dominants plays an important role. In
honour of Plato, who seems to have been the first who discovered
dominants in nature, they called the dominants "the ideas of Plato"
(Platonische Ideen). The name was not well chosen and produced many
misunderstandings.
Plato's "Eidolon" = form, figure, is toto genera
different from what by now, in all languages, the word "idea"
("Idee", "idée") means. The new word "dominant"
is much better.
The existence of
dominants in nature has been discovered independently by several by several
people. Aristotle - - I think - - discovered it independently of Plato,
although he was a scholar of Plato. But A. distinguished clearly between idolon
= notions and idolon = forces, which Plato did not distinguish
clearly enough. The "good" for him was an "eidolon",
although it obviously is no more than a notion.
Van Helmont,
a forgotten but eminent scientist and physician, called the dominant of an
organism its "Archaeus". Buffon called it its "moule
intérieur". Both said interesting things about it and found new aspects of
the operating of dominants.
Your
dominant is: "Teacher of others" and all parts or cells of your
organism are in the service of this dominant, except, at the moment, some cells
of your stomach. Let your dominant operate against your sub-dominants, with
cruelty and recklessness, as rulers are in the habit of doing. Write as
much as you can and you will perceive that from such a violence against your
sub-Dominants will results a restoration of your dominant's original
superiority
Do not take it
merely as a joke. (Epicurus' opinion was: That science also has an amusing
side. He was right. The humour arises if
things offer a new side, which in science is the normal course.)
(Mind over matter aspects in healing have often been
observed but never sufficiently explained, to my knowledge. To call them
"psychosomatic effects" is just giving them a name but does not
explain them. - J.Z., 4.2.02.
----------------
Jesus. About
100 years ago an author, whose name I forgot, published a book: "Proof
that Napoleon never lived". In this book he demonstrated that all
details from Napoleon's life may easily be derived from the movements of the
sun and the stars, so that Napoleon's life may be considered as a sun-myth. The
book was meant - - I think - - as an
attack on Niehbuhr's destructive criticism of old
Roman history. N. tried to reduce all the old stories to myths or inventions.
He went too far, although Livy certainly told many myths, which he honestly
took to be facts.
"Omnium in
omnia" said the old scholastics. All things in the world, nature, history
and our life resemble one another, because it is the same (unknown) principle
which underlies them. The events in heaven resemble the events on earth (which
astrologers know how to utilise) and molecules are models of the milky way. So
it is
easy to derive many details of Christ's life (or yours or
any other's) from the movements of the sun and the stars or from cards or
coffee-grounds or what experts of mantic may prefer. But there are details
which it is impossible - - I think - - to bring into any connection with
heavenly occurrences. An example: The development of Christ from a Jewish
nationalist to a cosmopolitan. In Marc. 7, 27 is reported that Christ declined
to heal a Syro-Phoenician girl, simply because she was no Jew. I need not
report the many passages where Christ had given up such a narrow standpoint,
natural for young men. The story John 4, 4 etc. shows that Christ at
some time had already given up his primitive nationalism but still preferred
Jews to other nations. (Verse 22.) At last he became an Antisemite.
(J.Z.: I.e., he opposed the narrow nationalism and
ritual-ridden religion of the then existing Jews, not an "antisemite"
in the modern meaning! - J.Z., 4.2.03.)
Here the development is clearly visible. Such things
cannot be invented, all the more because cosmopolitanism was far from the
mentality of his time and - - it seems - - of his pupils. (Luke 24, 21.)
Goethe says:
The world's history must be re-written from time to time. That applies also to
the history of Jesus.
------------------------
Some conjecture (the modern theologian Dibelius is
one of them) that at the time of Jesus there lived other miracle-workers (Acts
8, 9) and one of them may have been named Jesus, too, a name that, very
probably, was not rare at this time. The story with the wine at Kana (John 2,
2) may concern - - says Dibelius - - this other Jesus. The story is of quite
another character than all others. Only at Kana did Jesus contribute to the amusement
of others. In all other cases, he tried to mitigate their sufferings.
Therefore, I too believe that the Jesus of Kana has not been the reformer who
was, at last, crucified.
Some other stories
are, perhaps, to be attributed to other persons with the name Jesus, if
they are not invented. But here also, one must not go too far with the theory
that all extraordinary and reported stories are invented. We know now,
what auto-suggestion can perform. Probably you too have seen at some
"séance" how men or women took rain worms for oysters and dogs for
elephants. If one has seen such things, one understands at once a great part of
religious and other history, one understands how - - e.g. - - devaluation is
taken for a social reform, Free Banking is considered as unimportant and
average politicians are taken for honest men.
-------------------
Your bees. Very interesting that you are a bee-keeper.
And you give sugar - - such a precious and rationed thing - - to
bees and other be-ings (of which I got a personal experience) in cases
of emergency. That surpasses even Christ's demand to share things with others,
when one has either too much or has it double. (Luke 3, 11.)
Some assert that a
bee-hive is not merely a group of insects, but an animal, whose
cells are the bees. You may judge this theory by your own observations
If men get
too much food as in the case of the record-crops of 1920, 1931 and others,
there is no other help for them - - at their present state of their mind and
organization - - than to destroy the food, in wars, in civil-wars or (already a
great progress) simply by burning, it without a war. Bees do not do so,
because - - I assume - - economical theories lie far behind (J.Z.: If you consider them, jokingly, in
advance of us and "beyond them", if you consider them as backwards in
their development. Take your pick. - J.Z., 5.2.03.) them in their development.
But, what are bees doing with a surplus of food?
(J.Z.: They are "intelligent" enough to conserve
it rather than burn it. Honey can last for decades, although it will
crystallise. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
Some theorists
think it possible, that insects will continue life on earth, once men
have killed one another off by atomic bombs or in good, old classical manner,
by mutually eating each other up. (Are there examples of any bee eating
another bee????) May well be.
Certainly you know bee
stories from own experience, Care about publishing them?
----------------------
Article of the Observer
of 17.7.1949. (On strikes. - J.Z.)
One must distinguished the legal side of the problem from the social side,
as did the Observer. Legally the dock-workers (wharfies in Australia,
long-shore-men in the US. - J.Z.) worked for employers. Socially they worked
for the whole community.
A dock-worker
himself would find out the true reasons if, e.g.,
l.) the fire-men
would begin a strike just at the moment when the dock-worker's house would be
on fire, or
2.) the physicians of a hospital would begin a strike just
at the moment when he is brought to the hospital with
wounds that
require an immediate treatment.
In the year 1919 I
experienced such strikes (not firemen but restaurants, some physicians, some
midwives, all shops and a part of the police) at Brunswick, It was the
citizen's answer to the worker's general strike. In every case the citizens
won.
Language
subsumes the two kinds of strike under the same word, but the things are
very different, so that two different words for the two should be invented. A
general strike of dock-workers is morally and socially (though not legally) the
same as a strike of physicians and midwives.
In Brunswick it was
spoken of as a "Counter-strike" (Gegenstreik) or "Citizen's
strike" (Bürgerstreik).
------------------------
Braddock.
Are his voters collectively responsible?
------------------------
English payments
to USA in Sterling. When I spoke of Sterling
that was not exact enough. I should have spoken of means of payment to be
exchanged in goods or services or for receipts only England. It may be, that
after the evil treatment of good old sterling by the present government, one
day the English people declare: We will have nothing more to do with the
sterling! We pass on to another kind of standard, that is a fixed weight of
freely traded gold, say, a penny-weight of fine gold or so, which we will call
(what would be a suitable name??), and every one who tries to prevent us shall
get smashes (blows? - J.Z.) of genuine British origin. Every British subject
shall have the right, from now onwards, to pay with standardised certificates
whose face value is expressed in Gold-pennyweights, which are made good in his
business, which the worker accepts in being paid for his work and the
shopkeeper for commodities. We claim the right to unite for facilitating the
system or to transfer our rights (repeal reserved) to a merchant, who may issue
the certificates for us. USA-Exporters get no other kind of payment, and if
they are not content with that, then they may, in the name of three devils,
keep their cotton for themselves. (They will certainly beg to sell their
cottons for our certificates)
-----------------
Neither barricades
nor paving-stones are the right instruments of revolution but the "issue
of their own money,
in defiance of legal prohibitions, is such an
instrument. (Tucker, page 415, second line from the bottom.) The creation of
the instrument today in not any more as simple and relatively without
danger as it was at the time of Tucker. Nevertheless!
-----------------
Medical
treatment. Your doctor must publish his methods That is his duty and
should also be, for him, a pleasure. Kant says in his essay "Was heisst:
Sich im Denken orientieren?" ("What Does it Mean: To Orient
one's Thinking?"):
" … wieviel
und mit welcher Richtigkeit würden wir wohl denken, wenn wir nicht
gleichsam in Gesellschaft mit andern dächten, denen wir unsere und die uns ihre
Gedanken mitteilen!"
(" … how much
and with what accuracy would we think, if we would not think, so to
speak, socially, with others, with whom we share our thoughts and whose
thoughts we share!")
That means, in this
case: Your doctor should publish his methods, receive criticism and reply to
it. Then he can be sure that he is on the right track. (Lecturing is not
sufficient.)
----------------------
Yesterday I
received the October-issue of The Individualist. I congratulate you! You
did not promise too much when you wrote: "I hope, the next
'Individualist" will show the benefit of my increased leisure."
What you say of
currency unions is quite right. Free issuing of notes will be impossible in a
currency union guided by "experts" as at present. (They play with the
people the same game as, in the Middle Ages, the torturers did with their
prisoners. They let them hunger for a week or more and then cut a piece of
flesh from the prisoner's
body and fried it in his presence. The prisoner ate it with eagerness. -
- Is man a blunder of nature or not ???? (The piece of flesh cut by the experts
is the devaluated part of the money.)
"Scrimshanking" is a word not (or not yet) contained in
Webster, edition of 1880. In Thieme-Preusser's Dictionary of 1903 the word:
"scrimshaw (= work) - "Arbeit eines Matrosen in Mussestunden" is
contained. From your article I understand (of course) completely what the new
word means. All languages in the world have changed during the last 30 years.
Your article is of importance for practice of insurance. I am considering its
publication in a German Insurance paper. (S = shirking, according to my Shorter
Oxford English Dictionary. - J.Z.)
-----------------
Important ideas
often arise at the same time in several heads. The idea reported in the Readers'
Digest (article: "Invention", page 37 of The Individualist) came
also to P. Clavel Blount and an acquaintance of mine, and editor, Kurt Zube
(he edited some things belonging to Tucker's anarchism), who sent me his
pamphlet 2 or 3 weeks ago.
(J.Z.: If that refers to Kurt Zube's "Ideas
Archive" proposal, I would like to point that it occurred to him about 10
years before, but he could not seriously try to realize it during the war or
shortly after it. However, similar ideas can already be found in Thomas Morus'
Utopia and in the essay Atlantis by Francis Bacon. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
I seldom read a
news more consoling than your notice about British youth. Do try to live still
some more years for them. They are worthy! They seek their
teacher! Rittershausen told me one day: Au fond Free Banking is such a simple
idea that it must be possible to invent a game for children representing the
idea. "Free Banking for Young People", that would be a thing. Our
generation is too blocked.
(I noticed not difference, in this respect and many others,
between young and old, English, German, Australian and American people. - J.Z.,
5.2.03.)
----------------------
Moab and Edom - - you set
the main point into the right
light.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Johann Gottlieb Fichte, "Die Bestimmung des
Menschen", 1800. (The vocation of mankind.)
"Kein freier
Staat kann Verfassungen, deren Oberherren Vorteile davon haben, wenn sie
benachbarte Völker unterjochen, und sie daher durch ihr blosses Dasein die Ruhe
der Nachbarn unaufhörlich bedrohen, vernünftigerweise neben sich dulden; die
Sorge für ihre eigne Sicherheit nötigt alle freien Staaten, alles um sich herum
gleichfalls in freie Staaten umzuschaffen, und so um ihres eignen Wohles willen
das Reich der Kultur über die Wilden, das der Freiheit über die Sklavenvölker
rund um sich her zu verbreiten."
("Reasonably
no free State can tolerate constitutions of his neighbours, if these
constitutions offer advantages for the neighbours' rulers from subduing other
peoples. The mere existence of such constitutions is a perpetual menace for the
free State. The care for their own safety induces all free States to transform
all States in their neighbourhood also into free States, and thus, for their
own welfare, the free States must compel savages into culture and slaves into
freedom.")
-------------------
These principles,
quite new in the year 1800 and published (at Berlin) not without danger for the
author and the printer, are now pretty generally acknowledged. In the
year 1933 these principles were as just as they were after the second world. If
the rulers of England, France, Belgium, etc. would have mobilised, 14 days
after Hitler's revolution and occupied Germany, the loss of lives would
certainly have been less than 10,000. It was their duty, and they are
truly responsible for the second world war. Now they do try to hold responsible
ignorant, blocked and unarmed voters, who saw already in February 1933 what
rhinoceroses they had been and looked
out for help from other countries.
------------------ Bth., 2. X. 1949.
(J.Z.: Alas, the other States were not free societies,
either. The very notion of a "Free State" is a contradiction in
terms, if it refers to a territorial State. From territorial governments
nothing better could be expected than what they did offer, belatedly, in huge
costs in lives, health and wealth. Even libertarians and anarchists have not
yet, as a rule, pondered sufficiently about libertarian revolution, resistance and
liberation options and share all too many prejudices with the territorial
statists. Meulen's book, pamphlets and articles are full of them and he could
not, lastingly, be steered away from them, although B. tried to do this for a
long time, very persistently. - Every somewhat rational adult, who can read and
write and, nevertheless, still subscribes to territorial statism, of whatever
kind, is an accessory to the crimes which it commits, by its very nature, in
peace times as well as during wars, civil wars and revolutions. But since they
form, everywhere, the vast majority, they can hardly be held collectively
responsible by the tiny minority that does not share their prejudices, errors
and myths. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
11. X. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the protection of the people against inflation - - is
the right of every man to agree with others on a standard of value which the
contracting parties themselves believe to be stable - - gold, which more
than 9/10 will accept, if permitted,
silver (not the worst), grain (some new sects demand it for religious reasons)
or any other. In practice that means the application of gold-value-clauses in
the whole economic sphere.
The word "inflation" is here understood in the
sense of 1913, when it meant an over-emission of fiat-paper-money.
The increase of the price level is a consequence of
inflation and not inflation itself. Even Truman confounds that regularly.
The protection of the people against deflation is the
right of every man to offer his property - - goods, labour, claims - - to
others for exchange, with the help of standardised scrip in the denominations
of money and to be made good by him, in his own business, by acceptance or by
clearing. This right includes the right to associate with others, in any
suitable legal form, to give the system optimal efficiency.
The word "deflation" is here also understood in
the sense of 1913, when it meant the reduction of circulating means of
payments.
Decrease of the price level, unemployment, etc. are consequences
of deflation, not the deflation itself. That is something which our economic
"know-nothings" should learn.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
12.
X. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I reported the matter concerning your stomach to my friend
Mary Blösz and she told me:
Let Mr. Meulen ask the lady of his household for a raw
potato. It must be peeled. If Mr. M. gives his lady some good words, she will
do it for him. Then the potato must be grated with a grater. Then the grated
potato must be squeezed out. The juice is to be drunk.
The potato should be of average size, in no case too small.
Mr. M. should thus use a potato every day until the stomach
is all right.
Mary Blösz added:
This prescription was published one year or two years ago in
a German journal. The journal reported that in hospitals this simple means was
frequently used and with good success. The physicians were led to the means by
the observation that in case of burns the juice of raw potatoes has a
good effect. It is also known that women and girls of the people often use the
juice of raw potatoes for cosmetic purposes. The human skin reacts well to it
and quickly closes small wounds, which often occur in household work. If the
means would not be so cheap it would be used more used.
-----------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v.
Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 13. X.
1949. Your letter of 4. X. received 8.
X. 49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I beg to answer only "provisionally". My lack of
time in now very great, every minute is occupied. I don't know myself how the
1,000 things came to me with which I am concerned.
I return with the
same "The Scots Independent" of October 1949. The leading article
seems of greatest importance. If the idea of a money standard not subject to
any devaluation gets connected with any national idea, then the idea of a non-statist money
standard gets a power which no other power can resist. (*) You write to me that
the editor is an adherent of Free Banking. Is here the link which brings
the Free Banking Idea in connection with realty????
(*) (J.Z.: In theory
and by law every new nation's new central bank is supposed to provide a stable
value standard. In reality they all use the same forced and exclusive currency
system and it is abused by governments most of the time, with the system, the
law and its administrators not being held responsible for the results. Those, who
see solutions in territorial nations, large or small, usually subscribe also to
"central banking", its monopoly, fraud and coercion. Territorial
nationalism and monetary despotism are closely linked in most
"minds". - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
For some days now I
feel something which the Germans express with: "Ich wittere
Morgenluft". (I smell the fresh air of a morning. - J.Z.) (May be a
quotation from a forgotten poem.)
The editor is
afraid to destroy the unity of his movement. But certainly the movement cannot
be weakened by adopting the Free Banking Principle. (The editor is not afraid
to defend Henry George and his ideas, which are 100 times more likely to
destroy the movement's unity than are the Free Banking Ideas. There is a good element
in Henry George's doctrine but he never took into consideration what is now of
the greatest importance: That is the raising of prices, including that of land,
as a consequence of devaluation. Will the Single Taxers pretend that the
increase of nominal value to be expected is due to the activities of the community?
It is due to the blunder of a single man or of a few men, but certainly not
to the community in the sense in which Henry George meant it. One day that will
be found out - - by such a logical and educated nation as that of the Scots - -
and then the unity is in danger, if the editor insists on making land
confiscation a programme point of the movement.)
(J.Z.: George-ists say that this is not their aim and
method. But, mostly, they do treat private land owners as if they were
serfs of the feudal lord: the government, and the Georgist government
confiscates what it considers as an "unearned" income from land: the
added value not due to improvements by the owner but due to market forces,
among them an increased population or increased local density of population. -
Its "single tax". According to them the community alone would have
created this additional value and would thus be entitled to tax it away. They
stress that, otherwise, they would respect private land ownership and that
their reform would make it more widely spread and would put a pressure on to
use land economically. Thus their doctrine is different from those who want to
nationalise or municipalise land outright. Only a few George-ists have
considered realising their dreams of land reform voluntarily, privately and
cooperatively, e.g. by "proprietary communities" and through other
private land reform attempts. Fewer still have considered free competition
among all the land reform systems, at the expense of their supporters, which
means the acquisition of land for this purpose is to be by donation or by
purchase. At least Henry George was a Free Trader and Anti-Malthusian and
generally for a free market economy. But he had his hang-ups, too, apart from
the "single-tax", with his aversion against free migration. - J.Z.,
5.2.03.)
Free Banking does -
- in contrast to all other "plans" - - not demand that it be
imposed. It merely demands not to be prohibited.
If in Gibson's (apparently the editor of "The Scots
Independent" - J.Z.) there were only landlords and tenants and they
considered: If there is again an English Financial Dictator, who likes to
debase England's money, then, should that be the authoritative means of payment
for our leases? At least the majority of tenants, outnumbering the landlords,
would say: Why not? It's not Scotland's trouble but that of the landlords. Only
the landlords might strongly object.
(I took great liberties with B.'s English version here but
believe that B. would have said something like that, if he had revised the
following passage. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
(B.: "If in Gibson's Scotland will be - -
say landlords and tenants who like to agree: If again an English Financial
Dictator likes to debase England's money that shall be authoritative for our
lease - - well - - why not? It's not Scotland's pity but that of the
landlord.")
But Gibson demanded something more, namely, that everybody
in Scotland shall have the right to agree with others on a stable value basis
for all their contracts and that is a fair demand. Once it is sufficiently
published, it will not fail to supported by many people in England as well.
Gibson's
independence ideas and your Free Banking ideas together are like carbon
and nitre, together. One spark and it explodes. (Sulphur is useful but
not absolutely necessary - - believe an old anarchist - - and if not, refer to
the chemistry books.)
(They need considerable processing to explode like gun
powder, rather than merely burn fast! - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
Gibson may remember
that Scotland is the only country in the whole world whose money system was
an essential element of its nationality.
To revive that nationality without reviving the old money principles is
like galvanising a corpse.
I do hope that
Gibson will lead his movement without arousing any hatred against England as a
nation. Firstly, that would not be fair, and secondly - - in politics more
important - - it would be impossible. There may be serious differences
between the nations, but certainly there is no hate on any side.
It is another thing
with monetary independence. It may be demanded without any national antagonism.
I remember the days, in October 1923, when Hamburg declared herself
monetarily independent from Berlin. The Hamburgers remained good Germans and
were far from hating the Berliners. But the workers had built barricades to
prop up their demand for a wage-money constant in value. On the same day the
Senate ceded (with pleasure - - some other time I will report to you the
dramatic scenes), founded a bank for gold-based notes and, on the same
afternoon, the first wage-payments were made with the new money. (The Minister
of Finance, Luther, went the next day to the Mayor Petersen and threatened to
arrest him. But Petersen was the right man in the right place and told the
Minister, that if he would say still another word against the brilliant Hamburg
Gold-mark, then he would arrest him. "Be sure", he added,
"the Hamburg police obeys me and the only thing, which here is
still in doubt is, whether the Berliners will want you to continue the
inflation. Probably, they will sent us a wire: 'Keep the old note-printer"
(Luther - J.Z.) at Hamburg but send us, at our expense, the man who, so
rapidly, introduced a gold bank.' And now, old chap, cease to cheat your
countrymen, become honest and imitate us."
Luther returned to Berlin and founded - - not quite
so quickly as the Hamburgers - - his "Rentenbank", and issued some 100
millions of "Rentenbankscheine".
(J.Z.: B. told me that Petersen threatened to secede if the
Hamburg Gold-mark bank would be suppressed. Here one should remember, that
Hitler made his first putsch a few days later in Munich, 8/9 November 1923 and
similar attempts were to be expected elsewhere. Moreover, printing costs of the
paper Reichsmark came already, at the end, Nov. 23rd 1923, to 48 %
of the purchasing power of the fresh notes. Thus the inflation could not have
been continued much longer. Almost all printing shops were printing notes and
could not keep up with the demand for them, because prices raced ahead of the
printing presses. Many other more stable emergency monies were already issued
then, by officials or privately. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
----------------------
May Gibson proclaim
as an essential aim of his movement:
Everybody in
Scotland shall have the right to conclude contracts on a value basis which the
contracting parties themselves prefer,
but the old
monetary system of Scotland must be restored.
-----------------------
The opportunity to
do so is as favourable as it never was before and, perhaps, for many years it
will not come again.
And you - - prepare
a new edition of Free Banking. It Gibson follows the hint, the rest of the
present edition is sold in less than four weeks. Where can anyone - - today
- - get any information about the old Scotch System but in your book?????
And thousands will, if Gibson has published his monetary program.
It Gibson is an
adherent, then it is simply his duty to state this openly, so that his
followers may know what a man he is.
I prophesy to him, that he will not only have the pleasure
of having fulfilled his duty but a great additional pleasure. He will be considered as the monetary saviour
of Scotland and not only of Scotland.
----------------------
These few words in great haste. I hope to continue, in a few
days.
--------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(I do not know what kept him as busy in these days. - J.Z.,
5.2.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
14. X. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
Rittershausen sent me a clipping, dated Canton, 5th
of July, from which I learn that the new
Silver-Yüan of China's
"National"-Government shall have the relations:
1 USA - Doll.
= 1.75 Yüan,
1 Engl. Pound
= 3.72 "
1 Hongkong-D.= 0.24 "
The
"security" shall consist of
1.) Gold (for an honest Silver-Yüan certainly a
cheat),
2.) Silver (they are prudent enough not to say how much
silver) and
3.) "marketable bonds", which seems to be the
thing here in question.
Of course, the bonds are government bonds, probably a simple
sheet of paper, on which is written, that the government is willing to pay so
and so much Yüan at such and such a time. We know that from Germany, where
Governments, Corporations, etc. often created "guaranties" in that
manner. The bond is insofar marketable as it will be handed over to the fool,
who comes to the government, brings silver (or whatever the government can use
and demands the "security". (Not very different from the American system,
where the government pays 35 paper-dollars for 1 ounce of fine gold but
is intelligent enough not to deliver 1 ounce of fine gold for 35 paper-dollars,
but heartily delivers other "securities", that is: government bonds.)
Printing the bonds is not necessary, when in the whole of
China there is not one man so foolish as to demand that security. For a bond
that remains in the Finance Clown's drawer a simple sheet of paper is
sufficient.
(We know all that all from Germany, whose secret financial
history is still to be written.)
One may say: The
Chinese Government abuses a systems which, by itself, is quite sound.
And here lies a very serious error and
it is exactly that error which has produced 3/4 of China's misery in the last
decades, and not only China's misery.
The system is not
sound. It leads, inevitably, to inflation (the word taken in the sense of 1913,
where it meant over-emission of fiat money). If the system seemed to
work well, it was because a very different principle that was operating at the
same time.
This principle was that, which formerly in Austria and later
in the whole realm of the German language was called the
"Steuerfundation" (tax foundation - J.Z.). (Security by readiness of
the government to accept the paper money so as if would accept rare metal coins
of the same nominal value, the sum of the due but not yet paid taxes on one
side and the sum of the outstanding notes, on the other side, being equal. - -
I do not know, whether a special word for that kind of security exists in the
English language).
Lorenz von Stein, a great Austrian Economist, was - - as far
as I know - - the last who examined the "Steuerfundation". (He
demonstrated that if a government issues not more than 1/4 or 1/3 of its annual
receipts in notes, then the notes remain at par or - - if there would be
a discount, then it cannot be for more than a few hours or days.
But Steuart, long before him, demonstrated more: If
coins do not circulate in a sufficient quantity, the government must issue so much paper money
(not fiat money) that the means of payment for due taxes are not
lacking.)
While I write these
lines, I remember that Steuart was - - although very young - - the Scottish
Minister of Finance at the revolution of 1745. Steuart fled with the other
heads of the revolution, if my bad memory does, not deceive me, to Paris. There
he meditated:
1.) What blunders have I made myself?
2.) How must the revolution, and after the revolution's
victory, the country be organised to maintain the victory?
His intention was
to write a kind of reference book, so that a statesman - - in first line a Scottish
statesman - - regarding difficult questions, would have to do no more than look
them up in this book and would find there what he would have to do, in a
few lines. Never before was there born such a man as Steuart and, perhaps,
never later. What a great time, that 18th century!!
If Gibson
does not read Steuart, then every Scotchman who does read him with care
will be a better
Scotchman than he is. (Yes, he will be!) Goethe says:
"Was du ererbt von
deinen Vaetern hast, (What you
have inherited from your fathers,
"erwirb es,
um es zu besitzen. (Faust.)
you have still to study in order to really own it.)
By his protest
against the English devaluation from a Scotch standpoint, at the moment
Gibson is in the focus of the world's history. (Not of the written, but of the real
history.) It depends upon him, to remain there, as long as is necessary, until
he has made his movement irresistible. And then the end will, quite
inevitably, be the (peaceful) conquest of England by Scotland, in a similar
honourable way as in the year 1603, when Scotland gave a king to England
(not the best, unluckily, but perhaps not the worst, either.)
--------------------
The principle:
Value by acceptance, so as coins are accepted" (called by Rittershausen
"Annahme-Prinzip") (Readiness-to-accept-principle - J.Z.) and its
special application to taxes and State-issued paper-money was quite
known to W. B. Greene. In "Mutual Banking", chapter VI, he
says:
"We are told
that there is no instance of a government paper that did not depreciate. In
reply I affirm that there is none assuming the form I propose (notes receivable
by government in payment of dues) that ever did depreciate."
But one thing was not distinguished
with absolute clarity and the here necessary fanatic obstinacy, by
Steuart, Greene and Proudhon (but well
by Lorenz von Stein):
The present
possibility to utilise the paper money in payments to whoever issued it and the
future possibility.
The present
possibility is the only one which monetary science can admit as proper to
secure the par value of paper money. The trust of the note bearers, that
this possibility always exists, does enables the paper-money to circulate. Even
bad governments, which do not pay their debts, may be trusted to levy
taxes and so - - sometimes against their own desire - - create an opportunity
to realise the paper money they issued.
Besides: From this
simple statement follows, that a paper money, issued on the acceptance
principle, is no debt
of the government: It is a cheque drawn on the amount which
the taxpayer owes the government. The taxpayer,
who did not yet pay his due taxes, is the debtor, not the government,
and for a statesman, the difference is of fundamental importance.
The trust of the
public that a government will, some time in the future create an
opportunity to realise or utilise the paper money, is another kind of trust
than the trust that the government holds always open such an opportunity, as long as notes are outstanding.
Modern note issuers
- - Chinese, but no less, Americans and English confound these two very
different kinds of trust. They try to create a future possibility to
utilise notes - - generally by a promise to convert the notes in the
future (and think: Aprés nous le déluge!), which is an impossible thing
- - and imagine that this kind of utilisation is also sufficient to
achieve the same trust that is obtained by getting the notes realized,
on demand, now. Consequently, they do care to bring into balance the
always given but only relatively small amount that can presently be
utilised at par with the total quantity of notes issued.
The practical consequence is:
1.) all due taxes are paid, and yet a quantity of
notes remains in circulation which - - if the unlucky note bearers should
desire it - - cannot be utilised,
2.) shopkeepers, artisans, landlords and, practically, all
creditors, who are concerned with paying taxes, do not accept the notes at par,
if they do accept them at all,
3.) the not tax-paying people, workers, those who already
have paid their taxes and average women become angry - - not at the government - - at least not for this
reason - - but at those who, will not
accept the notes at par and who price differently, according to payment in
metal or in paper,
(The average human brain is not so constructed that it is
able to conceive a logical connection between two circumstances. if more than
two logical links are to be taken into consideration. So the average man or
woman demands that the shopkeeper to be hanged, whom he or she sees
retaining the needed commodities, and not the government, whose officials he or
she does not see besides the commodities. But economists and statesmen
should have better constructed brains.)
4.) The government feels personally offended by the lack of
trust. It forbids all utterances that may be interpreted as a distrust in the
circulating money. (That happened frequently in the Middle-Ages, when the
"Beschreien der Münzen" (decrying of coins? Throwing suspicion on the
coins? - J.Z.) was considered to be one of the most evil crimes.)
5.) Price regulations are introduced with all their terrors
known to historians for centuries but unknown to average people, deputies,
ministers, etc.
6.) Men are killed for violating the price controls, as
happened during the French Revolution (most of those guillotined were
"price sinners") and now in China.
And that all
originates from the failure to distinguish between the two kinds of trust:
a.) the trust of a creditor to be paid at the
promised date and
b.) the trust of a note bearer that there will always
be an opportunity to utilise his notes. (Especially right now, if he
wants to. - J.Z.,
6.2.03.)
The note bearer is not
a creditor (although generally thought to be a creditor) and not a debtor of
the State, except in the few cases where the note bearer is paying taxes by
notes.
What is the note bearer ????? Here, and in all languages, a fitting
word in missing. (To call the note bearer a claimant or an entitled
person would not be sufficiently distinct - - I
think.)
In the USA, where
the minutemen of 1774 are not yet forgotten and this expression is still
frequently used, the
term "monetary minutemen" could become a slogan,
which the man in the street will not fail to abbreviate into something like
"momime", by which he means a claimant, whose claim must be satisfied
within a minute.
(My great respect for Webster prevents me from
offering more details about the etymological side of the problem.
-------------------
A government must
distinguish
a.) the means of its
subsistence which it can raise by taxes and
b.) those means which
it must raise by a loan.
The government is
able to issue notes at par, notes that are not fiat money, for the amount of due
taxes. If the government wants more liquid means, than the due and not yet paid
taxes amount to, then it must borrow and pay interest.
If it tries to get these means, also, simply by
note-issues, it debases
a) in the case that
the notes are a fiat money, by a general increase in prices, and a discount at
foreign markets,
b) in the case that
the notes are not fiat money, by a discount at the open market, foreign and
domestic.
all outstanding notes and, as the very able German
(Jewish) author Lansburgh - - for many years editor of "Die
Bank" - - an internationally recognised monthly - - seriously demanded,
deserves death. Landsburgh demanded a standard which he proposed to call a
"Galgenwaehrung" ("gibbet-standard") (gallows currency -
J.Z., 6.2.03.). The present Minister of Finance (Treasurer - J.Z.) should at
once be hanged, if at the open and free market his notes would get a discount
for more than a very small amount and this for more than a very short time.
Landsburgh was quite right and in the Four Bills his proposal is contained,
although the authors would not talk of a gibbet in their Bills.
(J.Z.: Free market rating also for governmental and central
bank notes, the right to refuse them altogether and the right to issue, accept
and pay with alternative means of payment and clearing and to utilise for these
purposes alternative value standards, in other words, full monetary freedom,
would be a more humane approach and would end the inhuman conditions that
result when anyone, even the best of characters, is entrusted with all the
powers and temptations of monetary despotism. Absolute power corrupts
absolutely, in this sphere as well. Can and will Alan Greenspan act like a
libertarian and monetary freedom practitioner when he is in charge of the
Federal Reserve System? There he is largely reduced to increasing or lowering
his interest rate and to make seemingly profound sounding statements on that.
He has became part of that totalitarian machine. - J.Z., 6.2.03 &
23.5.03..)
Neither China nor
any other country in the world - - and the Scotch may believe it - - can
get a stable economy and avoid the planners, if the people do not
comprehend the above stated principles. The people must come to
understand these principles so well, that the government would
immediately encounter resistance if it tries to misuse the country's monetary
system for getting an additional income.
(J.Z.: Better, still, it must come to tolerate the establishment,
maintenance and growth of voluntaristic monetary systems, that would make such
abuses, among their participants, quite impossible! From these private and
voluntary payment communities or experiments the most honest and efficient
systems would spread, even while most of their new members would still not
comprehend why they do work, while the forced and exclusive currency systems of
governments do not. - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
It is sufficient if
in o n e country of the world the people display such a degree of true
culture. It seems that only Scotland can be that country, seeing that
only Scotland can boast of a good currency system as a national tradition
(one suppressed by brute force, but not yet forgotten).
Some years ago, I
wrongly believed that the Jews were able to blend an honest monetary
system with national traditions. From Zander I had received, as a
most valuable present (also burnt) (Who can provide me with a copy, at least
for microfilming? - J.Z., 6.2.03.) an extract, compiled by a Rabbi of Wilna,
from the Talmud, in which all monetary prescriptions of the Talmud
concerning good and debased money were combined. The Talmud states that
monetary honesty is an essential element of the Jewish character, so that an
orthodox Jew never will win by paying his creditors with debased money, even
when the Caesar has permitted this.
(J.Z.: B. told me, that the only exception granted was when
the debtor had himself been paid with debased money. How can such a rare
tradition in monetary matters remain as widely unknown and unpublished, at
least among non-Jewish people, and also as unappreciated among Jewish people? -
J.Z., 6.2.03.)
That impressed me strongly, and I was very clad to hear from
Zander that he would do what he could to revive the old Talmud traditions in a
monetary program of Zionism to be framed. He did nothing (or could do nothing)
and the monetary policy of Israel
is so tyrannical and dishonest as that of the goyim and not very far from
that of China. In my mind I cancelled all sympathies for the State Israel
(which has nothing to do with my esteem for the aristocratic part of the Jews)
and my hope now is Scotland.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(J.Z.: He should not have been surprised that the old
religious traditions of Jews were not realized in the territorial State of
Israel, where more or less orthodox Jewish people form only a minority and
their orthodoxies are more concerned with other matters than monetary justice and
efficiency. For precisely those groups of Jews did settle there, who
shared, all too much, the territorialist prejudices, errors and myths of the
other people, among whom they had lived and who were almost religiously
determined to realized these prejudices, errors and myths in their own national
territory. This they did, with the results to be expected. The other Jews in
the world, given the choice, rather stayed were they lived, making use of
whatever limited rights and liberties they still enjoyed there, or moved to
countries which had some liberties and some security left, while somewhat
sympathising with and supporting their fellow-Jews who had settled in Israel.
They never came to agree that it would be their religious duty to settle in
Israel. To that extent they remained cosmopolitans, which had formed, as such,
a more honourable tradition than their territorial and national ancient and new
tradition. That the State of Israel is more democratic than the other
territorial States around it, does not yet sufficiently distinguish it from the
territorialism of the other States around it, nor from that of the
"freedom fighters" or terrorists of among the Palestinians and other
Arab fanatics & fundamentalists. By upholding monetary despotism, with its
inevitable consequences: Inflation, mass unemployment, hatred of foreigners,
persistent financial difficulties, they perpetuated their own difficulties and
insecurity. Many of those Jews, who did not emigrate - or were deported! - to Israel, might even have realised that
concentrating all Jews in that small territory would, in essence, amount to
voluntarily establishing a form of "concentration camp", however
militarily armed and prepared for defence, one that could, one day, be very
rapidly turned into an "extermination camp" by a few ABC mass murder
devices in the hands of their racist, national, ethnic etc. fanatic enemies.
Nor did they realize, being also territorial nationalists, to a large extent,
despite many of their cosmopolitan views and connections, that precisely only their
limited exterritorial autonomy traditions, and those of the Arabs, as
opposed to their territorialist traditions, offered them repeatable and
extendable opportunities to dissolve these ancient and continuing collective
hatreds. Or they might merely consider Israel as a refuge option once
antisemitism in those countries in which they had stayed, would have flared up,
all too much, without any rational foundation, once again, usually as a result
of a crisis that can also be traced back - but would not be, by them and most
others - to monetary despotism. - I would not go as far as some, very few, Jews
have gone, in their criticism of Israel, namely to call those, who settled
there, as if this were the only or the best and most rightful solution for
them, the "Jewish Nazis", in spite of many differences between them
and the real Nazis, but, nevertheless, there are some traits of Israeli
nationalism which it does have in common with the extreme and racist
nationalism of the German Nazis: Their stress of the "blood and
soil", which I call "territorialism", its extensive economic
interventionism, coming in some respects all too close to national or State
socialism, their stress of the religions, national, ethnic and racial nature of
Jewish people - in spite of the fact that there are "Jewish" people
of most races, and their sharing, with all too many other people, what has been
called "the myth of the chosen people", God's very own people. So I
do not expect our "salvation" to come from these statist circles,
either. - J.Z., 5.2.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 15. X. 1949. Your letters of 4th and 5th
of October.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
your old shrewd Scotsman, with his remark about the
use of the word but is quite right. But: It is natural
that in a discussion the participants first state the items about which their
opinion is the same and then add a new item, whose consideration must enlarge
or restrict the other's opinion.
The word "but" is an excellent invention. I would
like to know whether other languages, like Asiatic, African or American ones,
provided an equivalent word to "but". Civilisation and culture depend
first of all upon language. Congo pygmies, Papuans and Australian Aborigines
probably - - I think - - have no expression like "but" in their
languages.
------------------
Your own
handwriting proves that the thicker down strokes are not essential to make
handwriting look very nice. I read your handwriting as if the text were
printed. And the characteristics of your handwriting is well enough preserved
by your Biro-Pen to distinguish it from all others. Therefore, I cannot accept
your arguments against Biro-Pens and will buy such a useful thing at the next
opportunity. The old Berlin proverb does also apply: "Alles Gute
ist nie beisammen!" (Everything that is good does never come
together. - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
----------------
I have learnt by now that Biro-Pens are filled with a
kind of cream. (Paste - before he had said: "powder". - J.Z.)
----------------
You are quite right
to say: "When our tourists take our currency abroad, it is equivalent to a
gift of our goods to foreigners. (As if they did not get the wanted tourist
services in return! - J.Z., 6.2.03.) But - - I think - - to give English
goods to foreigners is the very purpose of the kind of export which Sir
David so urgently demands. Essential is that Englishmen receive something
of equal value for the English goods. That condition is fulfilled, when
Englishmen, for their pleasure abroad do pay with English notes, and
then the notes find their way back to England, buy there what the note-holders
think to be useful or pleasurable and then the bought goods go abroad.
----------------
Gold prices.
Do you know the gold prices drawn from the edict of emperor Diocletian
about maximum-prices? The German mathematician, economist and great Professor Lexis
reduced the old Roman gold prices to Kilograms, Litres and gold-marks - -
about 40 years ago - - and, at once, it was to be seen, that the prices in old
Rome were not very different from those of the 19th century
in Italy. I think that some English economist will have reduced the prices to
English measures and English money. If not, and if you are interested, I will
try to get the former edition of the "Handwoerterbuch der
Staatswissenschaften", where Lexis's table is copied, and make, an
extract.
-------------------
I mentioned to you Louise
Saxe Eby's splendid book "The Quest for Moral Law". I could not
resist the temptation to write her some words about her chapter on Kant's
ethics and that of Buddha. Then, last week, I dreamt, immediately before
awakening, that I lost a tooth, but without a toothache. Artemidoros
teaches that such a dream means the death of a good friend but not of a
relative. Some minutes later the post girl hands me over my letter to Miss Eby,
with the stamp: "Décédé".
----------------------
Nietzsche's
criticism of Christianity. I do hope
to be impartial here, seeing that I am searching for a new religion (whose
elements, perhaps may lie in Kant's and in Schopenhauer's philosophy) and am
convinced that Christianity, which plunged the world in bloodshed and terror,
for more than 1,000 years, is not a good religion. But: Nietzsche
is - - I think - - not right. Nietzsche did not live among Christians and,
therefore, lacked an essential element to criticise it. Also Nietzsche did not
take, sufficiently, into consideration, that there are several kinds of
Christianity. To some applies - -
I admit it - - Nietzsche's criticism, e.g., to that kind of Christianity which
the emperor Constantine introduced, certainly because it was a religion
for slaves. Other kinds of Christianity
are no slave religion, although philosophy must reject them as well.
Take Cromwell's
Christianity. Certainly, he was a Christian. But had he the mentality of a
slave? Had his Ironsides such a mentality?
Take the
Christianity of Haiti. Before the French Revolution the slaves were
Christians and, perhaps, their religion was a slave religion. But
one day some Negroes of superior piety told their comrades: Listen, brethren,
the Whites murdered Christ, let us kill the Whites! And at once the Negroes
displayed the kind of Christianity, which resembled more the doctrines of
Torquemada than those of Christ. The let the whites pass through the
sugar-mills and used other killing methods, newly invented, to transport the
souls of the white to the places to which they belonged. I will neither defend
nor blame the religion of the Negroes, which led them to such
procedures, but when they practised them, they were slaves no more, they were
rebels. And their religion, certainly, was still a kind of Christianity.
It is well known
how the Haiti-religion developed. It is now what the Negroes themselves call a Vaudoux-Religion,
whose head is a "Papa-Loi", a kind of pope, and a
"Mama-Loi", the female pope, which seems not unlogical.
The old spirit of independence still prevails in Haiti, as
travellers report, and from that I conclude, that there must be something good in their religion, Well
- - from to time there occurs a little cannibalism - - before 1914 I considered
that as a serious defect. But since I have seen what the whites did, in their
wars, I must change my views and now I consider the cannibalism at the
Vaudoux-Festivals as a little "beauty-defect" (Schönheitsfehler). It
costs the life of one man a year and of one woman, and the
victims are proud to have been selected for such a holy purpose. They die - - I
think - - wishing good appetite to their fellows and these esteem them as holy
beings, who, in heaven, proclaim the high moral standard of the Haiti-people,
while their corpse is eaten.("To eat from the black, hairless swine"
is the technical term for the anthropophagic part of the great annual
festival.)
Christ
himself certainly was no slave-nature, if the evangelist-stories are true (and
I think, many are true). Christ was a revolutionary. I join the critics, who
assert that he had prepared a general strike of the taxpayers, insofar as
temple-taxes were concerned. The movement was a secret one. Some passages get a
quite reasonable meaning if one supposes such an intention for Christ. (Matth.
23, 39, John 16, 16, Luk. 24,21 is reported the word of a disappointed adherent
after Christ's death. Many critics said: How is it possible that an adherent
could be disappointed about the political failure of Christ, when he had
so often repeated: My kingdom is not of this world! The explanation is simple:
The aims of Christ were also of political nature, if one can call a
refusal of church taxes a political action. That there must have been some
quarrels between Christ and the tax-gatherers is revealed in Matth. 17, 24. The true story is falsified, as
can be seen from verse. 27.
--------------------
The papers report
that in the Ukraine there was a battle between rebels and Stalin's troops. 1600
rebels were
taken prisoner - - it is said. If the rebels have no plan on how to finance
their rebellion, then they must fail. I refer to my letter of 7. 9. 49.
A plan on how to
finance an insurrectionist army was drawn up by my friend Dr. Holzhauer, in his
book: "Barzahlung in militaerisch besetzten Gebieten" ("Cash
payments by occupying armies"). The book was published in 1939, some
months before the war. Nobody of the leading Nazis - - of course - - noticed
that Holzhauer had described a plan to finance an army fighting against the
Nazis and that this was the real intention of the book. The censors recommended
the book as valuable and worth printing. We - - Holzhauer, Rittershausen (who
wrote an introduction), I and 2 or 3 friends - - were seldom in our lives so
amused as by this decision. It is in the nature of the principle introduced
by Holzhauer - - identical with that of Greene - - that it can be abused by any
army which taxes a conquered territory. The Japanese constructed their
military notes for the Chinese conquered territory quite
in the manner proposed by Holzhauer, that is, without cours
forcé. Certainly they had read his book, and so one can say: Holzhauer's
principle was proven by practice. (Since Stalingrad I heard nothing from
Holzhauer.)
(J.Z.: His parents or siblings might have preserved the complete
manuscript! Georg Holzhauer was his full name. J.Z., 6.2.03.) (I reproduced the
printed book in PEACE PLANS, also a manuscript version and some relevant
articles, but, alas, the manuscript version, which seems to be identical with
the printed version, did not contain what I expected, according to a remark by
B.: an appendix on financing revolutions. Maybe that was not submitted to the
publishers, who were, like all other German publishers then, supervised by the
Gestapo. If his parents kept that appendix, then it might have got lost with
them. They lived in East Germany, I do not know for how long and whether Georg
Holzhauer had brothers or sisters. Books still do have their fates. Worse is,
naturally, the loss of B.'s book manuscript on financing revolutions, in the
air raid on Berlin on 22nd of November 1943. - If the Western Allies
had, instead, concentrated their air raids on military targets, then all
totalitarian regimes and dictatorships might have been overthrown long ago and
the Nazi regime would have been defeated much earlier. Thus did "Western
civilisation" "save" it self! - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
--------------------
Some years before
the war I had a book in which were described the payment customs in the Eastern
parts of Germany. Among others were mentioned the Kassubes, a small
people dwelling in the Prussian Province "Westpreussen" (At least
some Zubes lived nearby! - J.Z., 6.2.03.
- Recent website research by my granddaughter, Amanda, revealed that the
Zube-named people seem to have come from Switzerland. - J.Z., 23.5.03. ), in
the East of Pommerania. They speak their own language, which resembles the
Polish but which only Kassubes understand. The author reported that Kassubes
possess a special mentality for clearing. In their transactions they seldom use
cash and demand also from the peasants seldom cash. From time to time the
Kassube merchants meet at an inn (always the same for decades) and there they
clear, exactly like the merchants did in the Middle Ages, at Lyon, Cahors,
etc., at the fairs. The only difference is, that they use few papers and notes
but keep the greatest part in their memory and clear verbally. (That would
certainly have tax advantages! - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
Nobody but a Kassube merchant understands how they do that.
If only it would be possible to send your book to a Kassube! All people who try
to make the economy independent from the quantity of State money should know of
one another. (J.Z.: Did the Kassubes have an early connection with Switzerland?
Your guess is as good as mine. - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
--------------------
The true Supermen
are those who possess the following faculties:
1.) The Superman
conceives that an economic crisis concerns every man, the philosopher in
his solitude, like Nietzsche's Sils Maria, as well as the poet in Rilke's
garret (I do not like Rilke much), the average worker as well as the high
official. The average man takes an economic crisis, if it comes to him,
like a personal misfortune.
2. ) The superman
is so intelligent that he perceives
a.) if on one side there are un-saleable products
while, on the other side, there are men in need of these very
products, then there must be a simple means to achieve clearing.
The average man, when he looks at the
starving men, says: We have an overpopulation. If he sees the unsold
products, he says: the merchants
have
speculated and, besides, he is convinced that the standard of living has been
much too high.
b.) that the solution needs no sacrifice, no
additional taxes and no "harder work" - - especially not of the
unemployed - - but that the people must be provided with means of
payment to buy with. (He does not
fear inflation because he knows - - as
superman - - that without a cours forcé no inflation is possible and
thus
he rejects the cours forcé.) The average man says: We are in difficulties, and
difficulties must be
overcome by extra efforts.
3.) The superman
finds words to communicate his ideas and counsels his fellows, finds out the
secret to make
them listen,
knows how to escape being crucified, and he is present at every place where new
obstacles arise
(How? He
knows that.), speaks to men in the right way, so that they take up their work
instead of mutually
cutting their
throats, which, for average men is the next and the given way-out.
4.) If an
earthworm, by a blunder of fate, becomes a regent, begins a war, the superman
finds the words and the
means to
communicate the words to others, and so convinces the men not to obey the
earthworm but, instead,
to put it into
a box, where such beings can be conserved, until they can be used as bait for
fishing, which is the
best purpose
to which they can be put. Then the superman says to the men: Now, stop for some
minutes all
your everyday
talking, your card-playing and Schnapps drinking; here is a Magna Charta, which
you must
sign and which
prevents future wars. You have signed? Well, now go home and continue everyday
talking,
card-playing
and drinking. He finds the means to produce a (new? - J.Z.) He finds out the
means to get the
Magna Charta
read, understood and even a subject of interest. A mere man cannot do
that. If a man frames
such a Magna
Charta, he will probably be burnt alive and publicly.
The superman knows how to avoid such inconveniences -
- how??? I do not know, but then I am no superman.
-----------------
It has often been
remarked, that Nietzsche never said what his superman should do in this
world; he did not even say whether his superman will e a single man, a couple,
a group, a new race or whatever may be possible. I suspect that Nietzsche
himself did not know it.
-----------------
I must thank you
very much for the new mailing of printed matter, which I received yesterday at
the family Blösz.
In his National News Letter of 6. X. 49, Stephen King Hall -
- certainly not an average writer - - says:
"The
opposition … had no idea in their heads (at least none that they were prepared
to let out of their mouths) about the concrete measures necessary to save us
from threatening disaster."
He is right - - it
is an astonishing thing, considering that among some 100 well-educated and
interested men, there has been not a single one to propose positive measures. I
would have expected, that at least one of them would ask: Men, is that
really necessary, that England must pay for her imports from the USA with
Dollars originating in the USA?? Have we not ourselves enacted such a
prescription, which now shows that it cannot be fulfilled? Or has anyone - - the
Board of Trade, or the Bank of England or Cripps or any other - - abused the
plenary powers entrusted to him?? And who has forbidden USA exporters to accept
other means of payments from us than USA Dollars? Obviously, here lies the rub!
Let us talk about it! We must investigate that! Is it not self-evident
that a buyer must pay with the money of the seller! For centuries such a
condition has not existed.
And then another would have stated, that there do exist some
other possibilities, e.g. those which were investigated in the circle of
Professor Edgard Milhaud at Geneva. Should we not talk about the
possibility - - he would have said - - to pay with clearing certificates like
the following bond:
"This bond we, the
concern XYZ, accept in our business at the value of 100 dollars,
at the quotation of the
exchange at ABC."
And that firm is an English one.
Did the Americans already refuse such a payment?
Would not such a kind of payment provide the same services
as the present one - but without the latter's inconveniences?
Gentlemen - - this thing is important - - let us at least
state why it should be impossible, if it is impossible.
But, not a single
MP talked thus!
(J.Z.: Note also, that none of the secret services and none
of the government's famous economic advisors did. In these respects they know
no more and show not higher interest than the average man in the street. No
"supermen" among them, either. And so immense misery continues, trade
wars and finally bloody wars happen, again and again, also dictatorships,
revolutions, civil wars, mutual slaughters, which could all have been avoided
by really
freeing all exchange options. - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
In the edition of 8
September 1949 he says:
"The root of
the world's troubles is that man's progress in the technical business of
existence has not been paralleled by a corresponding in the art of living.
Our technology is 20th century but our modes of political thought
are medieval."
Here are some
errors.
The technique is not sufficiently developed. The art
to bring wanted products into the hands of the consumer belongs to the
technology of production no less than the care for the health of the workers
and the oiling of machines. That has nothing to do with art of living.
The latter is the art to use products in the best possible way, but the
transmission of products to consumers belongs to production no less so than any
other commercial action belongs to it. Stephen King Hall should read your book
and the publications of Milhaud's "Annals" - - still to be bought at
Williams and Norgate, Great Russell Street.
The technique of
payment was better developed in medieval times than it is today. In Cantor's
splendid "Geschichte der Mathematik" (History of Mathematics - J.Z.)I
found medieval specimens for clearing far superior to the specimens reported by
Jevons in his book "Money", where he describes the manner of clearing
at the London Clearing House.
The medieval merchants were not forced to pay all debts in
cash but only those for which a clearing was impossible.
(Many years ago I possessed the rules of the Leipzig Guild
of merchants, where that was explained. Burnt.)
Stephen King Hall
is in error if he thinks that our methods of political thinking are medieval.
In the 12th century it happened, at many places in Europe, that
when the serfs heard, once again, that Christ died for all men, thus also for
them, but that men must make himself worthy of it, finally, the serfs
agreed, and, secretly - - they needed months and years - - they prepared in a
forest but (if it could be) near a river, a camp. The camp was well provided
with victuals, stakes, the then new invention of the cross-bow (the pope had
forbidden its application against "Christians", that meant against
the nobility, because a bolt penetrated an armour at a distance of 60 paces)
and ballistas. The latter were of wood and could be constructed by skilled
carpenters. Then, one night, the serfs of a great nobleman and those of his
neighbours would escape and assemble at the camp, which, in a few hours, was
made unassailable. The serfs were well provided with water and kept everything
in the camp wet, so that fire-arrows were of no use.
And then they spoke: Here we are worthy to be redeemed by
Christ's death. We declare God to be our father, as Christ taught us, and we
hope that he will help us to maintain our freedom. Christ spoke always with
contempt of servants, well - - here we are no longer servants. The
nobility with its heavy armoured horses was quite helpless vis-à-vis these
camps. If rider and horses came too near to the walls, then they were shot by
cross-bows and the ballistas. And if the knights preferred to fight as foot-soldiers,
they met the long pikes of the serfs. Regularly there was a treaty agreed upon,
by which the new community paid a little redemption to the noblemen and then
the nobles kept peace. That seems to have been the beginning of the Hansa,
later powerful and celebrated.
(J.Z.: Probably many of
the medieval towns were founded in this way. But I doubt that many of these
events were ever fully documented in writing. The legend of "Robin
Hood" describes something similar for England. The Swiss republic probably
largely originated in this way. For me there was a somewhat related small
experience in the forest of Tegel, a suburb of Berlin. A group of nudists,
sunbathers and open air exercise people could not get permission for a place of
their own or could not afford to hire or buy one. So they simply cleared an
area in the State forest for themselves and used it for their purposes. It was
not very far from roads or settlements. Nevertheless, they got away with this,
for many years, although they had, obviously, broken many laws and stepped on
the toes of many bureaucrats, especially those of the forestry department. My
uncle Erich was one of them. I saw the place myself, as a young child. Few
outsiders ever reached that place. One had to know the small paths leading to
it and most forest visitors stayed on the main tracks. As far as I know, not
one of these activists was ever caught, convicted and punished. When medieval
serfs struck for their freedom, they had much larger forests to hide their
preparatory activities in. - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
Modern
thinking of people does not surpass wage-slavery. (Rather: The
employer-employee relationship. - J.Z.)
The worker thinks never of being more than a wage-slave. He
wants more pay and less working hours: That's all. the most revolutionary among
them demand to become wage-slaves of the State.
-----------------
With pleasure I
read your contribution to the issue of Truth, No. 3809 of 23. 9. 1949,
page 334: "Proudhon and Property".
I had some works by
Proudhon, also his project for a mutual bank. For many years it has been my aim
to translate it into German and supply a commentary. When I received, through
your kindness, shortly before the war, W. B. Greene's "Mutual Banking", I thought, that
the two books must be combined, in their translations and I was under the great
error: Perhaps the unknown power, which compels us to live in this … has
charged me with that task, and it may be that in Germany a
translation of these books would act like Hercules' clearing of the Augean
stables, by directing the rivers Penäus and Alphäus to the stables.
I did not translate the books, having only at the evenings
and on Sundays a little time.
The error of
Proudhon was to treat mortgages like present goods. But
everywhere the time element plays a
role. The exchange of goods, separated by time must
be done by credit instruments and the paying of interest is
unavoidable. The bank cannot simply mortgage a block of land by handing its
notes to the proprietor.
------------------
I have still much to write and hope to do it later.
------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 17. X. 1949. Your letter of
9. X 49., received to-day, (London Post stamp: 13. X.)
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the London saying you quote is amusing; it reminds me of the
word of Voltaire:
"Every
government possesses fortitude enough to bear its subjects' troubles."
The saying seems to be of possible practical application in
times of war. Then there constantly occur cases of retaliation: "10
English prisoners will be ill-treated for every German one ill-treated!"
"10 German towns destroyed for
one destroyed English town!" etc. Its very seldom that governments mind
such retaliations, least of all governments like the Nazi or the Soviet one.
(The Tsarist one, on this point, was no better than the Bolshevist one. I could
tell you stories of prisoners, German and Russians!)
------------------
My personal finances. You are a good-hearted anarchist - -
most of them were. (I cannot say: are.) We and a dozen others are the
last surviving. The goodness of anarchists was so striking to those, who first
came to know such people, that Zola pointed it out as an example. In his
Germinal - - a pity if you should
not have read it - - one of the main characters is an anarchist, by the name
Suwarine. He worked with the miners of a great French mine near Lens. Every
evening he was in an Estaminet, whose owner was a socialist, not in order to
drink there, but to talk with the miners. A rabbit came to him every evening
and slept on his knees. One day, he missed his rabbit and asked for it.
"The rabbit, he was told, is on the plate before you. You are eating
it!" Suvarine had to stop eating it. Nevertheless, the same man tried to
kill several hundred workers - because they had given in to the employer and
ended a strike. He had invented a device by which the mine would be destroyed.
Only by chance was it discovered in time.
The story of my
personal finance is less bloody. I get the legal assistance for unemployed,
which is paid for 1/2 year. (We do hope that by a new law that duration will be
extended to 39 weeks). In my case it comes to 24.90 West-marks a week. For me
it has been sufficient. And more: I have been able to buy a book from time to
time, especially in the Eastern sector. Among the books is a wonderful 10-place
table of logarithms, which I bought for 48 East-marks. (1 West-mark = 5.60
East-marks.) Some days ago, I saw the same table for 48 West-marks in a
bookshop in the Western sector.
I do not smoke,
drink no alcohol in any form, do not visit theatres, for all of which I did not
care for my whole life, and victuals are cheap at present in Berlin-West, much
cheaper - - counted in gold - - than they were before the war.
An example: 500 grams of oats cost 0.60 - 0.70 West-marks
and 500 g is enough for several days. At the time of the blockade and before -
- one can say from 1939 to 1949 - - they were generally considered a delicacy
and rightly so.
Spinoza lived on oats, for which he daily spent about
three old gold pence. This frugality enabled him to be quite independent and
gave him leisure to write books which are still read and, perhaps, more today
than at his time.
Formerly, I over-estimated Spinoza's frugality. Today I know
from my own experience that he was a gourmand
- - oats - - a good
thing - - also for bourgeois with rubber shares and other such instruments
extorting proletarian sweat.
(The invention of shares
increased the income of proletarians in the ration of 1 : 7 between
about 1800 and 1900 - - as a statistic of an economist of Basil seems to
demonstrate. The news of dividends is in the papers, c'est ce que l'on voit.
The real economic role of shares, c'est ce que l'on ne voit pas.)
I do hope to get an
old age pension once the unemployment assistance ceases. (He was 67 then and
was already entitled to an old age pension from his 65th year. -
J.Z.)
Concerning your
shares you remind me of Thales. His fellow-citizens mocked him, because
he was merely a philosopher and earned no money. One day that annoyed him. As a
scientist he knew, that in the next year there would be an unusually good oil
crop. With the help of his friends he bought all oil mills that he could get.
When the olives got ripe, the fellow-citizens had to give him good words, so
that he kindly permitted them to use the oil mills. He was as kind, but his
kindness cost them what it was worth. And now Thales came to be highly
esteemed and later, when he had succeeded in calculating a solar eclipse, they
took him for a being from the celestial spheres.
I would like to know how he foresaw the weather of the good
oil year. Our meteorologists are not so advanced.
Interesting what
you say about the habit of your Jewish friends. It is a very good habit,
one of the good Jewish habits. (I knew and old Jew, a very learned man
and of the best character. He was quite orthodox and ate nothing of what the
Talmud does not permit. In a special case - - I forgot what it was about - - I
asked him, why he was so orthodox, and what real advantage it had for him to
preserve, so carefully, the old prescriptions. He answered: I do not know why
our wise forefathers framed these prescriptions. But I think it probably that
they contributed in some way to the superiority of our race - - of which he was
fully convinced - - although I cannot see to what extent. So it may be with
many habits of the Jews.)
----------------------
Your doctor Gerson.
If the number of his successes is considerable (20 cases would already
by considerable, I think) then the basis of a statistic is given. 3 years are a
lot of time.
----------------------
Christianity. Although I am unemployed, every minute of my
day is occupied. I do not know myself how that is possible, but time is going
on for me much quicker than formerly, when I went daily to the office. And,
nevertheless, there are 3 authors whose works I read nearly daily, even if that
means only three lines a day:
The first is the author of Free Banking, the second is
Benjamin R. Tucker, the third is Montaigne. They are always before me.
If it is your opinion that the book of J. M. Robertson,
M.P., "Pagan Christs", is worth more than one of the three - -
especially for a man with my interest sphere - - I will be much obliged to you,
if you will be so kind as to send me the book. But really: I could read it only
at the expense of the three authors.
In Montaigne I
found a passage, important for you, who probably reads much more than I
do:
"Les livres
ont beaucoup de qualitez agréables à ceulx qui les sçavent choisir, mais,
aulcun bien sans peine; c'est un plaisir qui n'est pas net et pur; non plus que
les aultres; il a ses incommoditez, et bien poisantes; l'âme s'y exerce; mais
le corps, ducuel je n'ay plus oublié le soing, demeure cependant sans action,
s'atterre, et s'attiste. Je ne sçache excez plus dommageable pour moy, ny plus
à éviter, en cette declinaison d'aage."
About Christian Ethics
let me remark, that there are several Christian Ethics, which perhaps
must all be rejected by philosophy; but not all in toto. There is, e.g.,
the ethics of the Jesuits. Some of them - - not all - - taught that very
often in life there is no quite certain decision to arrive at. We must be
content with probabilities. If a man acts so as that he is probably
right, then he does what he can. I think that this doctrine has been followed
for many centuries, but recognised it was first by the Jesuits.
("Probabilismus") I think that here Alphons of Liguori and others
really added a new element to the theory of ethics.
Vis-à-vis some
ethical systems, which are represented by their authors as Christian
ones, I get the impression that the authors well knew the paganism in the
systems, but relied upon the lack of intelligence of average censorship. The
authors imitated Spinoza's example, who often used the word
"god" where he meant "nature" (Just like Rousseau
used the word "Souverain" and meant the people, in his Contrat
Social.)
When Spinoza was dead, the deception was detected. (He died
at 45, when others begin to write.)
Baltasar Gracián (I would regret it if
you would not have read him in an English translation - - or if you understand
Spanish, then the original of the Oraculo Manual - - I possess Schopenhauer's
translation), who lived at the time of Spinoza, became a Jesuit and did that -
- I am convinced - - only to cheat censorship. Authors like him inserted some
kind words about the virgin Mary (why not?), other saints, and some were even
impudent enough to dedicate their books to the pope. From the book of Louise
Saxe Eby (The Quest for Moral Law) I got the impression that the Saint Thomas
of Aquino was also such a "Christian". Certainly, many Scholastics
were, as appears from F. A. Lange's "Geschichte des Materialismus".
And what do we know
of Christ's Ethics? Little! Today some believe that he taught two kinds
of ethics, the one for his apostles, like John. It was an ethics fit for
wandering preachers. Social feelings and interests, as well as family feelings
and interests were not taken into consideration in this ethics. It seems
that he even denied for such adherents the duty of taking care for the
burial of dead family members. (Matth. 8, 22, Luke 9, 60.)
For the people he gave prescriptions of another kind, among
them such as not to keep the Sabbath-Prescriptions of the priests, not to wash
themselves for mere religious purposes, not to sacrifice beasts at the temple
and similar, which obviously were the real cause for which he was crucified.
Remarkable is his mild judgement of adultery, although he admitted, that it
might be a reason for divorce.
The ethics for his disciples seems not to have been a
secret. (Compare the different rules for priests, monks and nuns, compared with
ordinary believers. - J.Z., 6.2.03.) Belief in a future life was an essential
element of his ethics. An impartial
although sympathic statement is given in the chapter "Jesus", in the
book of the dead Louise Saxe Eby. It is worth reading. (Dead! "Was schön
und gut und gross auf Erden, nimmt ein schlechtes Ende." - Heine.
(Whatever is beautiful, good and great on Earth - comes to a
bad end.)
The real ethics of Christ's has not much in common
with that what today is represented, in many books, as Christian Ethics.
(Peter is in the Evangiles named as "one of the
twelve". But he cannot have been in Christ's company always, because he
continued to win his subsistence by fishing. Moreover, he was married and,
therefore, cannot have belonged to those, who left their families for Christ's
sake. Peter's wife, some years later, accompanied him in his missionary
voyages. I. Corinthians 9, 5.)
-------------------
18. X. 49.
I wrote the
foregoing lines with many interruptions. Meanwhile I received:
I. Three cuttings from the "Times", about which I
beg to write still some words,
II.) The "Times" of 29.9.49, "City
Press" of 7. 10., "Truth" (which I always read with special
pleasure) of 7.10. and
"analysis" of September.
In
"analysis" you marked the passage: "Why all this pother (bother?
- J.Z) about unification of the armed forces?
The matter was handled with dispatch by Alexander the Great, Ghengis
Khan, Napoleon and Hitler. Their way is ultimately the only way."
Let me here try to
translate what Kant said about the subject in his book "Zum ewigen
Frieden" (pages 68/69 of the first edition.)
(J.Z.: Since I have on hand a probably better translation by
Prof. Carl J. Friedrich (The Philosophy of Kant, The Modern Library, N.Y.,
Random House, 1949, page 458, I will give B.'s translation unchanged, as an
example of his best English translation efforts - he loved that passage -
without attempting to introduce my own "improvements". Anyhow, he
copied the German original paragraph below. - J.Z., 6.2.03.)
"The will of
all single men to live under a constitution founded on liberal principles (the
distributive unity of the will of all) is not sufficient for that purpose (he
means: eternal peace). Required is an additional moment, that is, that all
together will this state (collective unity of the united wills). That admitted
there must be added a special cause which overwhelms the differences in the
wills of the individuals, so that a common will is formed which creates a
whole, namely the society of citizens. The solution of this task is difficult,
and a single will is not able to solve it. This consideration lets assume that
in practice the realization of the idea will not be without force. It's
compulsion will create the beginning. On this foundation will be erected the
building of a new public right. One must not expect that the force which gives
the new laws will be lead by moral feelings, one must also not expect that the
force, after the crowd is united to a people, will it leave to the people to
create a new constitution by their united will. All that lets expect great
deviations of real experience from the idea (theory) to be realized."
(Prof. Friedrich's translation:
"Of course the will of all individual men
to live under a lawful constitution in accordance with the principles of
liberty (which constitutes the distributive unity of the will of all)
is not sufficient for this end. In addition it is necessary that all
jointly will this state (which constitutes the collective
unity of the united [general] will) which is the solution of a difficult
problem. Only thus can the totality of a civil society be created. Since
therefore there must come into existence, over and above the variety of the
particular will of all, such a uniting cause of a civil society in order to
bring forth a common will - something which no one of all of them can do - the execution
of the idea [of an eternal peace] in practice and the beginning of a lawful
state cannot be counted upon except by force upon the compulsion of
which the public law is afterwards based. This fact would lead one to expect
beforehand in practical experience great deviations from the original idea of
the theory, since one can count little anyway upon the moral conviction of the
legislator so that he would after he has united a wild multitude into a people
leave it to them to establish a lawful constitution by their common
will.")
German text:
"Freilich ist das Wollen aller einzelnen Menschen,
in einer gesetzlichen Verfassung nach Freiheitsprinzipien zu leben (die distributive
Einheit des Willens aller), zu diesem Zweck nicht hinreichend, sondern
dass alle zusammen diesen Zustand wollen (die kollektive Einheit
des vereinigten Willens), diese Auflösung einer schweren Aufgabe, wird noch
dazu erfordert, damit ein Ganzes der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft werde, und, da
also über diese Verschiedenheit des partikularen Wollens aller, noch eine
vereinigende Ursache desselben hinzukommen muss, um einen gemeinschaftlichen
Willen herauszubringen, welches keiner von allen vermag: so ist in der Ausführung
jener Idee (in der Praxis) auf keinen andern Anfang des rechtlichen Zustandes
zu rechnen, als den durch Gewalt, auf deren Zwang nachher das öffentliche
Recht gegründet wird; welches dann freilich (da man ohnedem des Gesetzgebers
moralische Gesinnung hierbei wenig in Anschlag bringen kann, er werde, nach
gesche-hener Vereinigung der wüsten Menge in ein Volk, diesem es nun
überlassen, eine rechtliche Verfassung durch ihren gemeinsamen Willen zustande
zu bringen) grosse Abweichungen jener Idee (der Theorie) in der wirklichen
Erfahrung schon zum voraus erwarten lässt."
You see the
difference of that what is meant by "analysis" and that what Kant
meant. Kant says (although not expressly): There must be, in the minds of the
individuals, an earnest will, that a power may be created to prevent wars. If
this will exists, then this will must be realized by a power, be it a
despot or a group. If only the despot acts
or the group, without having behind them the serious will of
the individuals, then their work will soon be destroyed. The fate of Alexander,
Genghis Khan, Napoleon and Hitler confirms Kant's meaning.
It was the opinion
of Kant, that the felt terrors of war will, at last, create a wish and then a
will for an organisation to maintain peace. At the time of the named leaders,
this wish was extant only in very few individuals
and, unluckily, merely in such men whom nature had not
endowed with the faculty to speak or to write impressively and convincingly
enough.
19.
X. 49.
Let me still add
some words about ethics.
Kong Fu Tse
reports that the old king Wen had invented a just social system. This
system greatly impressed his contemporaries. Kong says that the king received
messages, from all peoples known at that time, which begged him to conquer
them. An soon as Wen's troops passed the frontiers the people - - says Tong - -
ceased to obey their former governments and submitted to Wen. I do not know
whether a king named Wen ever existed, but from Kong's writings it is
certain that his ideas were not so far from those of Kant. That's also a remark
of the parson Wilhelm, whose translation I had. Wilhelm says that Kong Fu Tse's
ideas are best understood by continually comparing them to those Kant. Wilhelm
spent several years at the cloisters of Shantung to learn the philosophical and
religious language of Old China and to read all preserved commentaries on Kong.
From his translation may be seen that Kong's counsel is of practical
value for a statesman not less than for a department chief of a great store.
Concerning metaphysics
Kong told a disciple, who asked him about metaphysical questions: If you
would be really interested in important things, that is, social affairs and
problems, you would not have the time to meditate about such questions. But here Kong was wrong.
Buddha, on
the other side, underestimated the importance of social and economic questions,
favouring metaphysics
instead. (Against such a stand, Proudhon said: "L'économie politique c'est
la métaphysique en action.") Or are his political and economic speeches
altogether lost? At the time of Mohammed, Buddhism was prosecuted in India and
at last exterminated, because the monks admonished the people not to obey the
rajas if they demanded war services from their subjects, but to keep peace. It
seems not improbable that such an attitude traces back to Buddha himself. It is
estimated that more than 80,000 works about Buddhist thought were destroyed
during the persecutions.
(J.Z.: B. remarked elsewhere that one thing good about
Buddhism is that it has no record of initiating book burnings, not even of the
writings of its opponents. On the contrary, Buddha himself advised his
followers to study other systems of thought, in order to become all the more
convinced of the value of Buddhism. But I do doubt that any man's thoughts are
so numerous, valuable and condensed that they would really require 80,000 books
or essays as explanations. An encyclopaedic commentary would appear to be much
more sensible to me, especially seeing that no one, in a normal life span, has
the time to read more than about 20,000 books. Nevertheless, I would also
oppose the burning of any one of them. Perhaps some of them did contain some
pearls of wisdom not yet contained in the thoughts of Buddha and other
pioneers. - J.Z., 7.2.03. - To make my personal bias against all traditional
holy and religious books and for the writings of Ulrich von Beckerath quite
clear: I assert that this correspondence and his other writings contain more
sound ethics and good ideas and advice than all the traditional holy books
combined. Can you prove me wrong? - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
The trouble is that
people like Buddha and Jesus did not write. Kong Fu Tee wrote.
Thus we have an ethics of Kong Fu Tse but what lies before us, under the
denominations of Christian and of Buddhist ethics, contains quite heterogeneous
elements.
At the times of the
crusades a good Christian had to be a good warrior, too. That was also the
standpoint of Cromwell, of his Ironsides and also that of the Prussian soldiers
of 1813. But Tolstoy, the Dochuborzes, the Mennonites (to which my forefathers
belonged) are certainly Christians as well.
An essential part
of the older Christian ethics are the mortifications and in some Catholic
monasteries & cloisters monks and nuns still use girdles with points and
hooks and such things. All authors assert that these people are good Christians.
But Christ himself rejected that, ate and drunk with people of all kinds (women
of doubtful reputation not excluded) and was merry with them. (A strong
argument, that he is not an invention or a myth or a generalisation of star
movements but a real man.)
What the different
Christian ethics have in common is that what is also to be found in heathen
ethics. From that I am inclined to conclude that such a thing as a general
Christian ethics does not exist.
-----------------------
Different from all
other ethical systems is that of Kant. Unluckily, Kant as well had to
consider censorship.
Therefore he spoke more of God than would be
necessary today, but he always used the word in a way that an attentive reader
had to realise: he did not mean the Jewish Jehovah.
Kant departs from facts
and tries to explain them. He does not give prescriptions - - the word taken in
its general sense - - but tries to explain how a man may be disposed (? become inclined? - J.Z.) to fulfil his
duty, and he tries that with the same impartiality as today criminalists try to
explain what may be the causes that a man does
not fulfil his duty.
Kant says: Look at that man, whom King Henry VIII would
compel to bear false witness against Anne Boleyn. His life and even that of his
family are in danger. By one word he can protect his own life and win much
pleasure, too. He declines that and, although - - he is by no means a hero - -
he trembles fear of the king's revenge, he fulfils his duty, contemptuous of all pleasures which he could. win by
subservience. (I do not know the story and Kant does not mention the name. In
England he will be well known.) "Kritik der praktischen Vernunft",
II. part. (Thomas Moore. - J.Z.) Then Kant asks: How is it possible that the
sympathy of all men and even of children are on the side of the persecuted man
and not on the side of the king? Why do men not say: "What a fool he was,
to. reject to such a degree pleasure and risk death, torture, etc.? Maybe, that
of 100,000 not one could have resisted as he did, and, nevertheless, their
sympathy is on his side!
Kant remembers also
the French Revolution. ("Der Streit der Fakultäten.") He remembers
what very many average men expressed as their opinion at that time, with
astonishing courage, at Paris towards the Jacobeans and their government and in
Germany towards the feudal governments or their adherents, in both cases with
great personal danger. Were all these men also crazy to ignore, to such a
degree, personal danger and the pleasures which they could continue to enjoy
merely by keeping silent? Or, if they consciously risked the danger, was it
really a great positive balance of pleasures which induced them?
Kant said: One must
not abuse or misunderstand language and simply call that a pleasure induces a
which a man to act as if he acted by his own will or by a balance of pleasures,
when he risks and endures suffering. Here two moral elements are in action,
contempt and esteem, which should not be subsumed under such heterogeneous
notions as pleasure or displeasure.
Scientists like
Spencer, Bentley, etc. seem to depart from facts, but they do not. They
depart from the theory
(which deserves the name of a prejudice more than it rests
upon a lack of experience) that men - - average and others - - always tend to
gain as much pleasure as possible and to avoid as much displeasure as possible.
While such a theory holds true for a great part of economic and social life, it
does not explain the whole of history and of daily life. Such an expert as Adam
Smith said enough about it in his "Theory of Moral Sentiments"
and said it better than I could.
Schiller, in his Wallenstein
represents a politician of pretty noble character, who suffers from the great
error, that all men are guided merely by their advantages. He tries to defeat
the emperor by winning over the general of his army with much money, presents
and the promise of more future honours and the expectation of an honourable
peace with Sweden. He proved to be a bad judge of the mentality of humans and
of soldiers. The same generals, who had plundered and murdered, for the lowest
of motives, would not betray their emperor simply because they could not
violate their duty. (J.Z.: Or, what they considered to be their duty. In this
case, disobedience may have been their real duty! - J.Z., 7.2.03.) This small
remnant of a sense for duty, which remains also in such men as the generals of
the 30-years-war, was not perceived by Wallenstein, and for this reason he
failed.
The average man is
to 80 % a rascal, but not to 100 %. Science and practice must not overlook the
difference of 20 %.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
You say under
"Unemployment": "… our workers do not work so hard, especially
in coal mining ...". Are English workers really becoming more lazy?? The Output of coal mining and in English
industry decreased - - yes - - but is this the fault of the workers? I do
think that in general it is still true what Thomas Brassey, M.P., in his
book "On Work and Wages", London, 1872, 3rd edition, page
81, said, where he gives a typical example. (Typical at least for that time.)
This book was written with rare impartiality and Brassey himself seems a first
rate e expert. He owned one of the greatest railway construction firms, which
flourished already under the management of his father. Brassey says:
"I will now
give an interesting example, derived from my father's early experience in
France, in the construction of the Paris and Rouen Railway in 1842 … At one
time there were five hundred Englishmen living in the village of Rollebois, most of them were employed in
the adjacent tunnel. Although these English navvies earned 5 s. a day, yet it was found, on comparing the costs of
two adjacent cuttings, in precisely the same circumstances, that the excavation
was made at a lower cost per cubic yard by the English navvies than by the
French labourers."
Brassey mentions
numerous examples of this kind. I assume that the type of average English
worker I still unchanged. But circumstances do not remain the same.
(J.Z.: Among the circumstances to be mentioned here is the
growth of the trade union mentality, which expects continuously growing wages
and better working conditions regardless of productivity and at the expense of
the employer, investors and the community of consumers. Within the
employer-employee relationship and in an insufficiently free market, e.g., one
without free banking, there is actually no accurate enough guide to allocate
the shares of workers, investors, managers etc. in the total product. Thus
anti-industrial and class warfare results, leading to low productivity and ever
more government intervention. H. Dubreuil {"A Chance for Everybody"}
described this relationship as an "organised antagonism". The workers
want more pay for less work and the owners or managers more work for less pay.
The consequences of this relationship are widely seen but not this
relationship, as one of the main causal factors. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
The coalmines are now much deeper and some of them
are the deepest in the world. Their depth seems to have reached the limit where
a miner can work at all. (Heat, air pressure, dust, not yet investigated
influences of the interior of the earth.).
The output of
industry depends essentially upon the continuous investment of a part of the
product in repairing and replacing old tools and machines by new ones, etc. If
an employer must fear that his factory or shop will be "socialised"
(a bad word, seeing that the worst way, one to depreciate a factory's value for
society, is to hand it over to the government) or submitted to such
restraints, that it is, in practice the same as if the factory would be
confiscated, or if the employer is so heavily taxed, that he cannot any more
spend, for the said purposes, as much as he did before, then the output must
decline.
------------------
English payments in
Sterling. England wants wheat. Admitted. But does England want exactly USA -
wheat? I am convinced that, if England were to offer, as a means of payment,
scrip as I have described in my letters and in my dissertations on Milhaud's
system, to Australian exporters or to Indians or the Egyptians or even to the
Export Organisation of Romania, then they would at once accept.
You say: We cannot get it from anywhere else. I see no reason
for that, and from the printed matter, that I do get by your kindness, I see,
that the Milhaud system is quite unknown in England (and abroad) and was never
offered by an English firm. That is the reason why it is not accepted.
------------------
There are still some points to which I did not yet reply. I
beg to postpone them to one of my next letters and remain
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
Postscriptum.
21.X. 49.
It could be true, that "Milhaud-bonds", as I
described them in my letters and in my dissertation about the application of
Milhaud's system are not prohibited, because they are not to be made
good in money. I cannot verify that, because it is impossible to get here, in
Berlin, the text of the currency laws now valid in England.
(J.Z.: Even now, no one seems to have documented the
despotic monetary legislation in all of the major countries, by citing all the
relevant laws and their paragraphs. I leave it to those, who assert that it
would be easy to do so via the Internet, to actually provide this information.
Most people simply ignore the laws of monetary despotism, although all of them
do suffer under their consequences. They do not see them, thus do not comprehend
them and remain unaware of their causal connections. What they do see, are only
the results of these laws and their institutions and practices - and they do
ascribe them, usually, not to these laws but to a diversity of other and
presumed "causes". The real "arsonist" thus escapes,
unnoticed, even by most of those, who consider themselves to be
"economists". - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
--------------------
Redemption in gold is impossible as long as gold coins
are not obtainable. Nuggets, such as are now sold in New York (100 ounces in a
tin for 4,000 paper dollars or a little less) are a very bad
"Ersatz". (substitute. Single large nuggets do also have a special
collector's value, above their metal value. Taxation of such transactions also
interferes with free convertibility, even when trade in gold bullion, gold dust
or nuggets and in gold coins, as well as private gold coinage, have, otherwise,
become free. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
--------------------
You were so kind as to send to me the Quest of August
1949. The paper is of great value. The editor is seeking for the truth
quite earnestly. It is always a pleasure to state that. At page 7 he quotes 21
lines from "The Individualist" and adds 22 lines of a commentary,
from which it can be seen that he tries to understand the I's principles. The
passages on page 7 were not marked. If they should have escaped your
notice, then I will return the Quest and beg you to send it to me again,
occasionally.
---------------------
Letters by air-mail from Berlin are only permitted to
Western Germany. To send them abroad, they can only be sent it the sender, or
another person abroad, sends what here is called "Internationale
Antwortscheine".
(J.Z.: IRC's, International Reply Coupons, obtainable at all
postal offices and representing one ordinary air mail letter charge. - There
and then they were, obviously, used as another bureaucratic and obstructionist
practice of the postal monopoly. It may also have been used to force letter writers
to expose their letters to perusal by communist authorities, when they were
carried by rail or truck through East Germany instead of by air mail over it. -
All kinds of obstructionism were associated with the blockade attempts of the
Soviets trying to destroy the independence of West Berlin. - In spite of their
publicly posted threats: "We will know how you have voted! Beware
of the consequence once we take over!" - West Berliners voted
overwhelmingly against the communist candidates, giving them even less votes
than there were card-carrying members of the Communist Party in West Berlin.
Alas, that kind of "action" constituted the limits of their readiness
to resist the Communist regime. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
With pleasure I
read my letter to you of 1.8.49., printed in the "New Generation",
October edition. I thank you very much for the trouble you took "to lick
it into shape". (In Schopenhauer I found the expression, used from a book
of Hegel, that the later editions were "zurechtgeleckt". Schopenhauer
spent some years in England, as a boy, and there forgot his German, so that his
mother-tongue was rather English rather than German. Now I know where he got
his expression, which in very pleasant.)
In the second
section of my letter I said:
"It seems I
agree also, with Mr. Kerr, that it is the task of the science of population to
determine or to estimate for every country, for a given time, under given or
supposed circumstances, the optimal number of inhabitants."
The printer omitted the here underlined words, so that the
readers do not know what I had said. Luckily everybody sees that here is merely
a misprint. (? - J.Z.)
I will try write a
reply to Mr. Drysdale's supplement to the "Malthusian"
of October 1949, "The Scientific Path to Peace and Prosperity"
because you are so kind as to promise to lick it into shape again. From a logical
point of view, D.'s article needs more to be licked into shape than by my
article, written in a poor pigeon (pidgin? - J.Z.) English. Not even in one line does D. mention
the fact that in all food producing countries - - Germany, before the
war, by no means excluded - - the producers complained bitterly of bad markets
for food and demanded from their government to do what it could to increase the
number of eaters and thus the quantity of the produce that is actually
eaten. During the whole of the 6,000 years of known history there was not a
single case reported of the people in any country standing in queues before the
bakeries, although the crop was normal, peace reigned, money lawn were
supportable, Free Trade was admitted and transportation facilities were as they
could be. D. says nothing about that.
Bth.
(J.Z.: When you see such endless and mostly fruitless
opinion-exchanges, then you become more and more aware of how necessary an
encyclopaedia of the best refutations of popular errors, myths and prejudices
is. Once it has been compiled and published, people would make themselves
ridiculous, in the eyes of all who owned and used such an encyclopaedia, if they
did not pay attention to the refutations of their own views in that reference
work. And refuting them would become very easy - by simply referring them to
some pages in it. Once they got several such short replies, they would finally
try to check out their own views, with the aid of that reference work, before
trying to spread them. The urge for social esteem is rather strong with most
people and they fear ridicule and public exposure of their ignorance and
prejudice more than anything else. - Imagine the effect this could have on what
is now considered to be the public debate on political, economic and social
issues, full of popular "muck", on all sides. By now, such an
encyclopaedia could be very rapidly accessed, either online or on a CD-ROM.
Alas, like so many other enlightenment options, this one, as well, remains
ignored by "freedom lovers" of all kinds. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 21 X. 1949.
Your letter of 18.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
I was so impressed by Mr. Gibson's splendid article and see
its possible economic, political and even historical consequence in such a
brilliant light before me, that I simply forgot to answer the question posed by
Mr. Gibson: "Who pays
the subsidy on devaluation for the exporter?"
Excuse me! But I still feel like Goethe did at the
evening of the battle of Valmy, when he said to his companions:
"From here and
today a new epoch of world history begins, and you may say: we were
present."
(Von hier und heute
geht eine neue Epoche der Weltgeschichte aus, und ihr koennt sagen, ihr seid
dabei gewesen.) Reported in the "Campaign In France" [Campagne in
Frankreich], Chapter: The days from 19. to 22. IX., 1792.)
An increase of
export by devaluation is essentially the same what in German is called a
"Ramschausverkauf", that is, a selling-off with loss, in the hope to
keep the clientele won for later, after the prices are raised, by the low
prices offered now. Although economical history offers no example that such a
hope was ever fulfilled, if applied to a country's economy, the idea remains in
the heads of average merchants, politicians, etc. They generalise shop sales
experiences into the world's market. Already Adam Smith observed that and,
generalising this observation in the right way, he stated:
Merchants never were and never will be good politicians. Equal to merchants are
politicians who are impressed by the merchant's counsel and their manner of
considering the country's economy as a great riff-raff-handling.
(J.Z.: Here, for once, B. did not consider the need that
merchants often have to achieve at least some cash flow by setting emergency
sales prices, due to the deflationary consequence of monetary despotism. By
fixing, with the help of monetary despotism, the sales price of the own
official currency below its market rate, they do also achieve a sell-out of it,
at this emergency sales price, which leads to such an additional demand for the
own and devalued currency that, as a rule, and at this exchange rate, it can
only be satisfied by putting the note-printing presses into operation. The
result is the usual fiat paper money inflation (that of forced and exclusive or
legal tender paper money), which soon, within 1 - 3 years, depending on the extent
of the dependence of internal prices upon the prices of imports, which are
raised through the devaluation, leads to an increase in internal prices
corresponding to the degree of devaluation and, also, that of the increased and
corresponding paper money printing. A further discussion of this aspect can be
found in my essay in PEACE PLANS No. 8. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
One has - - I
think - - to distinguish between the questions:
I.) who pays
for the devaluation and
II.) who bears it's costs.
The latter seems of
special interest.
Professor Wagemann
an eminent economist and for many years manager of the "Institut für
Konjunktur-Forschung", examined, about 15 years ago, the history of
devaluations (already at that time offering an immense
material) and found: In about two years - - in
the average - - the gold prices before the devaluation are restored in the
country's export trade. That's a very important statement, and, if it were
generally known, there would be very few devaluations in the future.
(J.Z.: Did Wagemann or others also observe the corresponding
gradual increase in the internal monetary circulation and the effect this had
of the free market rating of this currency on foreign exchanges or on the black
markets? Gold prices would, after this intervention, have come back to the
prior ones but paper money prices certainly would not! [Unless the monetary
despots arranged a deflation.] That paper money price-inflation is only
possible due to additional issues of legal tender paper money, for which the
devaluation created an additional and enforced demand. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
Wagemann's
statement admitted, one can say: After an elapse of two years - - in the
average - - every citizen contributes to the costs of a devaluation, the
exporters not excluded.
Pending the two years, there is no other change than an
increased export, nobody looses and the exporters win, including the industries
depending upon export, their workers, etc. After a few days, in some spheres,
the effect of the increased prices for imported goods begins, is passed to
consumers, by consumers to employers and so to the whole community. Some are
disadvantaged without being able to pass their losses: Those who get pensions,
those who were imprudent enough to save with savings institutions, most
landlords and the creditors of the State, of corporations etc. In practice,
although not in theory, there are also the disadvantaged railways and the post.
Others win more than corresponds to the degree of devaluation. The situation
may be compared to that of a burning city. The city loses, although there are
always some who win by stealing or selling goods that are at the moment
precious.
That such a
development is quite natural may also be derived from an observation for which Karl
Marx did not claim priority and which really can be found in earlier
writings, but which he gave in a nice and impressive form. Marx says: If it
costs the labour of 10 days to produce an ounce of fine gold, and if there is
an some commodity which requires 10 days of labour, too, to be produced, then
there arises a tendency, irresistible in the long run, to sell the commodity X
at the price of 1 ounce of gold.
This admitted, it
is clear that a commodity, whose price is artificially debased by devaluation -
- the price expressed in gold - - one day must be sold again at it's original
gold price. Wagemann's investigation completed Marx's statement in a
very important detail, by finding out the time required to regain the original
gold price or, in other words, by measuring the strength of the tendency which,
in the long run, brings prices to their labour value, that of gold included.
From Marx's
observation follows the inefficiency of every price regulation, although
Marxists (who very seldom read
their master's writings) do not draw this conclusion, on the contrary.
The labour value of
produced things is not constant; even after the very important improvement of
it's theory by Jevons ("Theory of political economy") namely,
that one must not only consider the really spent labour but the probably to be
spent labour in the future, then required to produce something. But in practice
these 2 different prices do not differ much.
On the other hand, Jevons' improvement leads to a just
distribution of the social product which is quite different from that proposed
by Marx and his followers, the latter seeming just, but is, if applied
in practice, at once felt as an unsound principle and this by the labourers
themselves. That is confirmed by the development of wage-systems in Russia.
For the present discussion it is not necessary to enter into
the interesting details of Jevons' improvements of the old labour-value theory.
------------------------
In Berlin the effects of the devaluation are already felt.
Here are some prices from my own observation at the shops where I buy the few
things I want for my subsistence:
Before &
after devaluation
Hair cutting
0.80 DM 0.85 DM.
Sugar
1.00 " 1.15 - 1.20 DM.
Cheese
(Romadour)
0.40 " 0.55 (A kind of salmon. -
J.Z.)
See-Lachs (a fish
not translated in
my dictionaries)
0.50 0.55. (Salmon. -
J.Z.)
Sugar cubes were
priced, three days ago, at 1.20 DM per pound (500 grams) and are now 1.30.
An attentive housewife would be able to mention more items.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
22.
X. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the Eastern
Magistrate of Berlin - - in many respects much more active than our Western one
- - publishes a Statistical Yearbook, which contains some figures for the whole
of Berlin. Interesting seems the statement concerning the marriages of the Jews
in the years 1946 and 1947.
Then and there were married Jewish
men women
1946 1947 1946
1947
20 24 72 75
to Protestants
11 2 10 17
to Catholics
- - 2 1
to other Christians
66 68 66 68
to Jews
- - - - Other religions
11 17 13 13
Partner not belonging to a church or religious community
- - 3 -
Unknown to what religion the other partner belonged
108 111 166 174
Total number of marriages of Jews.
It is known that
pious Jews like to marry Jews. But in Berlin the percentage of Non-Jews
married by Jews is remarkable. There
will not be many towns in the world where this percentage is higher and perhaps
it is the highest in Berlin. It may prove that the personal relations of
Jews to Non-Jews in Berlin are as good as they can be, and that racial
prejudices on both sides are not strong enough to influence marriage
statistics.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(The total number of intermarriages was probably higher,
seeing that many of the Jewish survivors or returnees did not want to be
registered as Jews or were not registered a such, having past and future
prosecutions in mind. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 23.X.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
(This is the first and possibly only time that even this
short address was correctly scanned! - J.Z.)
experience proves that the best and most important truths or
aims are overlooked and considered an trifles without a good slogan. (Compare
my "Slogans for Liberty" project! - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
Mr Gibson now wants a slogan for connecting Free Banking
with his Scottish nationalist aims. No one else than you is able to supply it
or them.
For centuries the
Scotch had the right to create their currency, if it became scarce for
any reason. Scotland claims this right again.
For centuries the
Scotch had the right to agree with others, fellow citizens and foreigners, upon
any standard of value which they thought to be suitable, gold, silver, grain or
any other. Scotland claims this right again.
For centuries the
market has been free In Scotland, not only for commodities but also for any
kind of exchange. Such a thing as foreign exchange control is considered as
tyrannical by Scots who preserved their old sense for freedom, in the economic sphere as well.
Scotch should not
forget, that clearing was in full use, when it was still considered as
unreliable by the greatest English firms. Scotch should also not forget, that
clearing centres are a Scotch invention. (Jevons, "Money")
A nation as
advanced in economical and financial science as the Scotch has the right to
decline economic and financial plans imposed by others.
------------------------
Some points for a
programme:
Investments, by
which employment in Scotland is created or enlarged, should be free from all
taxes for a generation, that is for 25 years. That principle applies to foreign
imported capital too.
If cooperatives buy
plants, factories, estates and concerns by instalments or in other ways, such
transactions shall be free from all taxes and the rights of the former owners,
insofar as the not yet paid price is concerned, shall also be free of all
taxes, income tax, property tax and estate-duties, provided that the
cooperative excludes no Scotchman from Membership.
Scotland imposes
upon every Scotch worker, artisan or other man, doing useful work in Scotland,
the duty to constantly compare his economic situation with that of similarly
situated men in the whole world, whose income is higher.
Scotland imposes
upon them the further duty to publish suggestions by which his economic
situation can be brought to the same level or a higher one than the best know
of others in the same profession, in any part of the world.
It is the aim of
Scotland and every good Scotch citizen that Scotland, in all kinds of human labour,
culture, science and efficiency of her resources shall be the first country,
with Scots leading in all kinds of progress.
Scotland declares
that justice shall be the foundation in all relations between citizens, between
citizens and the government and between citizens and foreigners. She imposes
upon every citizen and official the duty to use the old Scotch freedom of speech,
if he believes that in any part of relationships the highest possible degree of
justice does not prevail.
---------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
Postscriptum. 23.
X. 49.
Scotch have always
demanded the right to help themselves if the government is not able or not
willing or not competent to help them. Therefore, Scotch have always declined
and still decline the mentality still prevailing among some groups abroad, that
it must be the privilege of the government to introduce social, economic and
cultural improvements, to plan such improvements and to impose
them upon the people. The Scotch refer to the bad experiences, economic,
political, cultural and social with such imposed and supposed improvements and
do also refer to the fact that never has such a plan failed whenever it was
worked out by free Scotch citizens in free associations.
-------------------
I beg to remark: No
plan, national, social or other has any sense (? - edge 2 letters obscured. -
J.Z.) if it does not consider the situation of the workers and does not open to
them the possibility of a higher standard of living. Workers consider the present economic system
as unjust and are right, although they have not the slightest notion about what is unjust in this
system. That private capitalism is not the right thing, capitalists themselves
admit. Workers - - and most thinking
capitalists - - see no other way out than State capitalism. But now - - in
Eastern Germany and Russia - - they see what that means in practice: a single
employer with governmental powers, which,
in Russia, has already put 1/10 of the people into
concentration camps and in Eastern Germany is not far from achieving this
objective.
You will know from
the history of socialism what an enormous moral force, ca. 100 years ago that
movement was which they call today cooperative socialism (voluntary socialism -
J.Z.) (Genossenschafts-Sozialismus).
Here I need not mention such names as Owen, Buchez and so
and so many others, which you probably better than I do. In Germany, socialism
an a real and organised power began with Lasalle, who won the workers
with his
ideas about cooperation.
(He would have financed them by the emission of 100 million
Thalers of fiat money; his early death preserved him from a great shame and the
movement from a disaster. Jews - - in general - - are able to adapt existing
financial or monetary systems to their aims, but are not able to invent new
principles. The honourable exceptions - -
I mention Zander - - do not
refute the rest. The new State Israel, as one of its ministers expressly
stated, will surpass all other States in enforcing the State monopoly of money
and suppressing the "black market". Not a single Jew - - alas, not
even Zander - - protested.)
Here (See above! -
J.Z.) is a quite new idea of creating cooperatives. The new plan enforces
nothing, does not take a penny from anybody, suppresses nobody, but merely
creates new opportunities. The idea that State-favoured
cooperatives should be obliged to accept everybody as a member comes from Theodor
Hertzka, who, in his two forgotten but excellent works:
"Freeland" and "A Visit to Freeland" ("Freiland"
und "Eine Reise nach Freiland") (J.Z.: At least their English
editions were reproduced in my PEACE PLANS series. - J.Z., 23.5.03.) demanded
that check against new monopolies by cooperatives. In my book " Does the
Provision of Employment Necessitate Money Expenditure?", sold a Williams
and Norgate Ltd., Great Russell Street, 1935, gave some details about the
financial part. (The translation is not the best; the translator did not quite
understand the subject. But the French translation by Buriot-Dariles is
excellent.)
I do not expect
that more than about 1/100 of a country's economy will transformed by
cooperative action (the word taken in the sense here meant), within 20 years
after first being started.
Cause: The mentality of the workers does not yet tend
towards self-help, but still expects help from somewhere else. (From the stars,
too, as in old Babylonia. The number of astrological Weeklies and Monthlies
will not be smaller in England than it is here. I counted at the news-stands
five or six magazines treating economic and monetary questions from an
astrological point of view. Last week one of them investigated the possible
stability of the West-mark from its horoscope. (I would not spend 30
West-Pfennige for the issue.)
But the possibility
is held open, and this possibility, to leave the present system at any
time, if required, will make the system supportable for many people, whom in
other countries, where such possibilities are not given (or not seen)
become dangerous revolutionaries.
---------------------
At least two times
in Germany have the workers had all power required to change the
"capitalist" system, that was 1918 and 1949. In both cases none
of the leaders had a programme, and if there arises another situation,
where an immediate action is required but no programme is available, then it will
be the government
which acts, sometimes by an inflation, which does always,
for some time, extinguishes all political interests of the people and replaces
them by one interest: How to win the bread for the next day - - so that
the government is safe for some time - - or by State capitalism or by sending
the masses to battlefields. The latter is the most simple, requires not the
least meditating and is, therefore, executed in most cases - - by Napoleon I,
Napoleon III, by the Commune, by Chinese Communists, who use both, and others,
which a better historian than I will remember.
How different would
have been the situation in Germany if it would have been possible to represent
to the workers a practicable programme!
(J.Z.: That can be done today, on microfiche, on floppy
disks, on CD-ROM and on the Internet. But the former 3 options are not yet
sufficiently taken up and on the Internet such offers are drowned in a flood of
trash or flawed or incomplete ideas and discussions. - A proper market for all
enlightening and liberating ideas has not yet been established by libertarians,
not even a comprehensive encyclopaedia, or their own, bibliography, review,
abstracts and definition and slogans collection, far less an alphabetical index
to all their writings and, in spite of the availability of enormously powerful
and cheap alternative media, they have left most of their writings unpublished,
un-translated or out of print! Can one truthfully say that the Communists and
Christians have been as foolish in the treatment of their writings? - J.Z.,
7.2.03.)
-----------------------
Mr. Gibson seems to
be the man to learn from history.
-----------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
A devaluated West-mark may be counted as equal to 5 old
gold-pence, when at the free bullion-market 48.526 Paper-Dollars buy 1 ounce of
fine gold. The latter relation corresponds pretty accurately to the present
quotation for small quantities of fine gold.
-------------------
The number 5 may be
verified in this way:
1 sovereign =
7.988 grams standard gold.
Standard gold = 11/12 fine.
1 sovereign = 240 pence.
1 ounce = 31.1035 grams.
1 West-mark = 0.238 Paper Dollars after devaluation.
31.1035 x
0.238
48.526
------------------------------ = 5.
7.988 x 11 x 1
12 240
Bth.
23.X.490
__________________________________________________________________________________________
(Transcript of a hand-written and undated note by B. on a
slip of paper):
"The Scotch
learned from their experiences in these years, that this mentality is the right
one also to get reforms of the society as a whole."
(You be the judge where this note is to be inserted, above
or below! - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
24.X.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I do hope - - no - - I am convinced - - that Mr. Gibson, in
the manifesto to be prepared, will declare war towards State-capitalism. It
needs courage, but that is a quality, which Scots were never short of.
All scruples are to
be overwhelmed by the realisation:
It is 100 times better for Scotland to be governed by a
private capitalistic government, with its seat in London, than by a
State-capitalistic government with its seat at Edinburgh.
May Mr. Gibson
compare Latvia's, Lithuania's, Estonia's situation, social, political,
cultural, economic, financial,
at the time of the Tsars with their present situation under
"autonomous" governments.
Separatism with no other programme than this very separatism
must fail, which may be learned from the history of separatism in the last
decades of Germany. (In the Rhineland it failed through strong French military
assistance.)
Individual freedom based on national independence may - -
and in the long run must - -win.
(J.Z.: I do hold, on the contrary, that any form of rightful
national or other group independence can and should, in the short as well as
the long run, win only - - if it is fully based on individual freedom, even to
the extent of "individual sovereignty", "individual secessionism"
and completely voluntary associationism or "voluntaryism". That
requires also their full exterritorial autonomy, under personal laws,
constitutions and jurisdictions. B.'s version here may be only due to his
flawed English or to the hurried writing of a short note. I do not know. But I
do know that generally he did share the view that I have here expressed. Matter
of fact, he converted me to it, from my general individualist anarchist point
of view to a quite tolerant form of panarchism, not only for individualist
anarchists and other anarchists but for all kinds of "isms" - that do
respect the freely chosen "isms" of others - by not coercively
intervening with their practices, however much they may criticise them or even
joke about them. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U.
v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
(Population of England
in 1688 - J.Z.)
Extract from a Table
prepared by Gregory King, 1688
from details furnished
by a hearth tax statistics..
A.) Number of persons in one household, including servants,
(average)
B.) Total number of persons in the indicated class.
Numer of
Households (Blame the crooked lines on Microsoft Word! -
J.Z.)
A B
160 Temporal Lords
40 6,400
26
Spiritual Lords
20 520
800
Baronets
16 12,800
600
Knights
13 7,800
3,000 Esquires
10 30,000
12,000
Gentlemen
9 96,000
5,000 Persons
in greater offices and places 8 40,000
5,000 Persons
in lesser offices and places 6 30,000
2,000 Eminent
merchant and traders by sea
8 16,000
8,000 Lesser
merchants and traders by sea 6 48,000
10,000 Persons
in the law
7 70,000
2,000 Eminent
Clergymen
6 12,000
8,000 Lesser
Clergymen
5 40,000
40,000
Freeholders of the better sort
7 280,000
120,000
Freeholders of the lesser sort
5.5 660,000
150,000
Farmers
5 750,000
15,000 Persons
in liberal arts and sciences 5 75,000
50,000
Shopkeepers and tradesmen 4.5 225,000
50,000 Artisans
and handicrafts
4 240,000
5,000 Naval
officers
4 20,000
4,000
Military officers
4 16,000
50,000 Common
Seamen
3 150,000
364,000 Labouring
people and out (? - J.Z.) servants 3.5 1,275,000
400,000 Cottagers
and Paupers
3.25 1,300,000
35,000 Common
Soldiers
2 70,000
?
Vagrants, as gypsies, thieves, beggars, etc. ? 30,000
___________________________________________________________________________________________
5,500,520
Reproduced from "History of the Homeland" by Henry
Hamilton, London, 1946.
Bth., 26.X.1949.
(Note by J.Z.: If the 750,000 farmers and their
family members and employees had then been the only food producers in
England and if all their produce had been for the English population
only and If other producers and traders had not also traded for food
from other countries, then one could say, that each of the farmers and their
hands, including babies, infants, sick, crippled and too old people, had been
sufficient to support, each, in the average, 7.33 of the other English people
by their food production. When subtracting from the number of farmers those not
fully productive, for the above hinted at reasons, then the number of
Englishmen supported already then by one food producer would have been even
larger still. Moreover, by that time probably only a fraction of the arable
land in England was under cultivation and the standard of agriculture was
probably not very high. However, many other people kept a vegetable and fruit
garden and kept e.g., some chicken, rabbits, ducks, geese, pigs, sheep and a
milking cow, without being farmers. I did not include the 160,000 Freeholders,
either, not knowing how much they were involved, in the average, in food
production. Obviously, lawyers were already then all too numerous and also the
clergy. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
27.X.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
by your kindness I received some days ago the Liberty
issue of January 11, 1896.
54 years ago! It
was about the year 1900 when I heard, for the time, of the existence of
"Liberty". I was extremely curious, but I saw no possibility to
secure a number. I was a very poor boy at that time and could spend, for
literature, no more than 50 Pfennige a month. (*) Moreover, I did not know
Liberty's address. And now - - nearly 70 years old - - I do get a
number, and, more than that, I speak to a friend of Tucker, who 100 times more
than Gladstone deserves the name: the grand old man.
(*) (J.Z.: That was 50 Gold-Pfennige [well, copper Pfennige,
of which 100 amounted to one gold-mark] more than I had as a school boy, until
1951, when at 18, I began my apprenticeship, earning in the first year only DM
80 a month, from which, after I left home, I had to spend DM 30 for rent. I got
no pocket money as a schoolboy. My mother earned very little in cash or was
unemployed or on social services. Whatever little I earned, e.g. by delivering
newspapers like the "Der Kurier" and "Der Tagesspiegel",
went into the family cash to keep us alive. - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
I took the number into my hand with a similar feeling as the
man who discovered, some months ago in Palestine, the eldest copy of the
prophet's Isaiah's book - - more than 2,000 years old. But I prefer Tucker to
Isaiah. There lived many men like Isaiah, but there is only one Tucker.
-----------------
The copy arrived here in no good condition, and at the last
page a piece was torn. The German post is ill-famed for it's evil treatment of postings in envelopes
greater than the usual 11 x 16 centimetres. (Such mailings are tied together
with wire-cord and so compressed, that often the envelopes tear and the
contents is damaged.) I tried to repair the number a little with tape.
-----------------
The article "Voluntary Co-operation", author F.
D., T., is very interesting. The principles stated are - - in general - - - right and true. Nevertheless, the co-operative
movement became a very powerful one, and if F. D. T. would have foreseen it, he
would probably have written another article. Now, when in England and in
Scotland the co-operative societies became so eminent that - - I read - -
before the first world war they owned 6 steamers, at least one of them
travelling between Colombo and London, mainly occupied with transporting tea,
there must be something good in them not known or not sufficiently appreciated
by F. D. T.
F. D. T. takes it
for self-evident, that a manager (and I think that now all cooperatives
in England and in Scotland are guided by managers, not by committees) will
always demand so much salary that for the cooperative it would be more
advantageous to dissolve and to hand the shop over to the manager. In practice
- - as experience has proven - - such cases are rare. The manager is quite
content to do his work for a salary, which seems to many businessmen very low.
The salary is low also if it includes a premium (turnover-commission), so that
it is always in his interest to extend the cooperative's business. But - - and
political economy may have to learn something here - - there are many
individuals who perform better, if they get a constant salary instead of
being paid like an employer earning his money. Why? Let me remind you that 300
years ago, at the time of the 30-years war (no - - 301 years ago - - it ended
1648 by the intervention of a girl of 18 - - queen Christina of Sweden) it was
taken as self-evident that an officer must have a stake in warfare. He
got the right to tax the occupied countries, to win booty, and, although
plundering was often forbidden in the contracts, the governments let the
officers plunder, often even the own subjects. And then came governments like
the Dutch and then the Prussian, whose rulers knew human nature better than the
a-priori-thinking "experts". They gave the officers a good salary and
forbade them to take any stake in wars. Honour should be their only
reward. And what was the effect? Officers of a much higher quality than
the booty-hunters of
the 30-years war.
Whoever knows
co-operative work from the own experience knows also the dutiful, modest,
diligent and active manager of a quite different character than the average
shop-keeper.
Until 100 years ago
shop keepers in England - - you know that better than I do - - were considered
as second-class people, which in many clubs, unions, etc. were not accepted as
members. They were not considered as respectable. Managers of cooperatives were
never exposed to such contempt.
F. D. T. speaks of
the experience of retailers, their ability, etc. Very many retailers are
simply unemployed, who had saved a
little money and think: A man of 50 seldom gets a good new job. I buy a shop!
In England that will not be otherwise than in Germany. At New York I found the
same.
An average
shopkeeper does not like improvements in his shop, although they cost the least
money. He prefers to squeeze the employees (or employee - - most occupy only
one - -) or to cheat the customers. The manager of a co-operative has quite
inverse interests. An average shop, 30 years old, will not look much otherwise
than at the first day. A cooperative store, after 30 years, will, in general,
be very much enlarged and improved and work with several employees.
F. D. T. only considers consumer cooperatives. That is a
development whose future will not be sensational. Very much more important are
- - I think - - factory cooperatives. Perhaps they will not perform better than
the present system. Perhaps. But there are several very important
aspects to be considered.
I.) Strikes are practically impossible in a well-organised
cooperative. Every associate is his own employer - - against whom will he
strike?
II.) The associates are directly confronted by the real
economic life, know what price fluctuations mean, bad crops, good crops, what
competition means and, after some years, they get a mentality much more like
that of an ernployer than that of an employee.
III.) While now technical improvements are difficult - -
because the workers fear to lose their job by anything that saves labour - -
and often use "sabotage", destroy the improvement, etc. - - in a
cooperative association everybody is interested in inventing something to
reduce labour-time, diminish pains and troubles. While now no more than about 2
% of all patents are used in practice, under the new system the
percentage will be much higher. It is estimated that in England now about 60
"iron slaves" work with every English worker. Under the association
system it will soon be much more, in less than 10 years certainly double the
number and in 20 years the fourfold one - - uninterrupted peace and a liberal government
provided.
There is much to be
said against factory cooperatives and Beatrice Potter, married Webb, said it in
her book on co-operatives. These grievances can be overcome. Managers like
Bata, the great shoemaker, used the cooperative principle in his own factory,
divided the whole concern into several hundred associations - and with the
known effect.
In Italy after 1900
and more so after the Russian Revolution of 1905, many agrarian cooperatives
arose with very good success. They hired the land from the feudal lords, of
whom many were unable to conduct their agrarian affairs.
IV.) During the next social revolution the managers of
factory-cooperatives are safe, while employers, perhaps, will be killed.
------------------
I return hereby the
"Liberty" issue.
------------------
Tucker's pen was
very sharp. That was a "défaut de ses vertues". Without such a pen he
would probably not have attained much. But that he treated a man like Yarros
so badly, I do regret. Yarros (I conclude, from the little that I have read of
him) was a sincere truth seeker, no blockhead and of great impartiality.
I get some
consolation from the poem on page 7. When I read similar poems in
Germany, I was afraid that old
Germany really became crazy, and when I saw that Morgenstern's
"poems" won an as wide-spread applause, I had a prevision of what
came in 1933. But in the USA similar poems were of no consequence. They are a
sound people. Not always does a poetry of that kind announce disasters, but
often it really does (no less so than the birth of a child with two heads and
such things - as believed by our forefathers).
The poem begins with "Banks". At first sight, I
thought the author meant our banks, issuing notes and regretted, that Proudhon
could not read it. Proudhon asserted that modern economic thought could not be
brought into poems or songs. ("Encore la marsaillaise!") And here the
contrary seemed to be performed. But now I guess, J. William Lloyd meant such
things as in the evening couples sit upon, seldom pondering the problems of
note-issuing.
The way in which Tucker printed "Liberty" deserves
imitation. I prefer it to the usual kind of printing. I have myself some
trouble to get the lines equal in type writing. If line of unequal length
become common, then mine will be found as beautiful as others.
The idea of the
Anarchist Letter Writing Corps is a good idea. It should be revived, firstly
only with the theme: Free Banking.
-------------------
Is Tucker's memory
at Boston maintained? (Is Tucker being remembered in Boston? - J.Z.) ?
-------------------
In the year 1911 a
Canadian lawyer, who must have read Tucker, wrote a book of at least 12 pounds,
in three languages (burnt). He was named Internoscia, and his book had the
title: "International Law". If anybody would have the intention to
write a codex to decide quarrels between Tucker's voluntary associations, then
he could not have done better.
(J.Z.: Jerome Internoscia, New Code of International Law;
Nouveau Code de Droit Internationale; Nuovo Codice di Diritto Internazionale,
1910, 1003 pages, 5657 paragraphs, with alphabetical index. It was reproduced
by me on 11 microfiche, in PEACE PLANS 85-95. If there had been sufficient
interest in it, then I would have got it re-fiched on a lesser number of
microfiche. Alas, most libertarians are interested only in all too little of
the total libertarian literature and imagine that all older writings of this
kind are quite outdated. B. said later that this volume should be taken as a
general guide and if an international arbitration court would wanted to deviate
from its rulings then it should have to publish all the reasons for arriving at
a different decision. - J.Z., 7.2.03.)
------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 28. X. 1949. Your letter of 26., just received.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
with much Interest I rend the letter of 20. I. 49 of Mr.
Gibson. I return it here-enclosed. Many thanks!
Reprinting the
discussions in the parliament about devaluation and commenting upon
them, from the standpoint of the Free Banking Theory, would furnish a book
creating a new departure in economics. You could write the book if you
were to read less what average contemporaries said and wrote and what is
forgotten the very day when they said and wrote it, but would, instead, devote your
precious time to write more and teach your follow citizens.
(J.Z.: For those, who still take the utterances of
politicians serious and thus their debates in parliaments, and other public
speeches, there should not only be a printed version or extracts but also one,
unabbreviated and unedited, on a website. The MP or minister etc. should also
be free to add his comments. But, much more important: All interested citizens
should there have the opportunity to add their comments to any word, idea,
sentence, paragraph or speech - by a link, leading to their own
counter-statement. Such a website should be conducted as one of the expenses of
a parliamentary democracy or republic. Each speech could thus be open to
critical dissection by the public in a widened democratic debate. Also to the
few approvals to be expected. One might also insist that once any remark of a
politician, thus recorded, from inside or outside of parliament, has led to at
least 10 serious and valid corrections there, of real faults in logic, facts,
ideas and arguments, then such a statement, with all the corrections added,
should also be published in at least one major newspaper, preferably at the
expense of the salary or pension claim of that politician himself, who had,
obviously, misinformed the public as much and who lives and rules,
nevertheless, at the taxpayer's expense. A certain number of objections should
also automatically lead either to his censure in parliament or to a recall
move. Such a treatment might help to induce them to say less, inform themselves
better and to stick closer to the truth, while reducing the mythology
surrounding them. The public would then also have easy access to whatever they
had said, in public, on any subject, in the past and thus also, indirectly, to
the all too much of what they have managed to leave unsaid. That would be
brought out in the comments. I can well imagine that a weekly or monthly which
published nothing but such corrected statements, perhaps after the first flood
of corrections, i.e., a week or a month later, could be a commercial success. I
can also imagine that all members of opposition parties would gladly utilise
the information thus supplied to them by the public, to attack their opponents.
This mutual correction between politicians, with the help of the public, might
also prove to be somewhat effective. The public would thus also have a
permanent public memory on hand, to catch these professional liers (most of
them!) in any contradictions in their statements. And against all their waffling,
evasions, false pretences etc., semanticists, genuine political scientists and
philosophers could have a field day. What they say in parliament and otherwise
in the public, hardly ever educates anybody, i.e., hardly ever conveys any
worthwhile truth. But good enough comments to all their utterances, by the
public, could. Carlyle even asserted that no one in Parliament every convinced
anybody else. That was not quite true, if one remembers the Free Trade
movement in England, but came close to the truth. Thus, instead of going on
with the pretence that the elected politicians are the best informed and most
wise men in a country and do lead and enlighten themselves and the public with
their wisdom, let us reverse the role and use the system to enlighten the
politicians and at the same time the public by this democratic self-help
measure. It might become a popular sport, like the shooting of clay pigeons.
Initially, before it has had its beneficial and enlightening effects upon the
politicians, it might even be as easy for the objectors as shooting fish in a
barrel. Moreover, this material could there be easily sorted out by subjects
and periods, names and parties. This approach might lead, temporarily, to the
fullest development of parliamentarism, by a parliament of the people, by the
people and for the people, and then also to its decline, by demonstrating what
jackasses most politicians are and always have been, with their laws, measures
and institutions.
The latter would happen, if Herbert Spencer's suggestion on
the review of all legislation were finally also realized, in this way, by a
review of all laws, on any subject, the reasons for them and the reasons for
their repeal as obviously ineffective and then the numerous attempt to legalise
and enforce the same nonsense once again and again etc.
The various voice stress analysers, lie detectors etc. that
are now available should also be applied to all their public speeches and the
results of these tests immediately published together with these speeches,
perhaps by also providing corresponding links, as if these results where
offered by one of the living objectors or commentators. For a while a rather
silent parliament might result. The public should also be able to offer its
comments to any proposed new bills, in the same way and with the same medium.
Maybe that would lead to a referendum that would demand:
1.) No more than 10 new laws a year.
2.) No law to be longer than 10 pages.
3.) Every law to be worded in a language an average voter
can understand.
4.) For every new law enacted at least 10 old laws have to
be fully repealed.
5.) Any raise of salaries and expenses etc. to be made
dependent upon them having first repealed another additional 100 - 1,000 old
laws, without introducing any new one.
6.) Any law to be subject to a veto on the grounds of
individual rights, by a public arbitration court set up for this purpose.
7.) No law to be valid for more than 10 years.
8.) Conscientious objection to be allowed to all peaceful,
non-criminal dissenters to any law.
9.) Individuals to be free to opt out from any territorial
law and contract their own personal law instead - or to do without.
10.) Individuals to be free to opt out of the whole body of
legislation, constitution, administration and jurisdiction and to contract
their own voluntary protective communities under personal laws.
You add your own
wish-list - towards independence from politicians, their ignorance, their
prejudices, their flawed ideas, laws, institutions and actions! - J.Z., 8.2.03.
- and from their legalised orders and monopolies. - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
The economic theory
from which Sir Stafford Cripps and his adversaries both depart (start out - may
be more logical, since, obviously, they have not yet separated themselves from
it. - J.Z., 8.2.03.) may be compared to the old astronomical epicycles, the
foundation of antique and mediaeval astronomy. It was much more
complicated than
Copernicus' system and required much more mathematics. From a mere geometrical
standpoint it explained the stars' movements as well as the heliocentric
system; beyond that it had the immense advantage of being in accordance with
the popular view, and with Aristotle and the Jewish-Christian religion. Before
Newton proved that the Ptolemaic system was dynamically impossible, the
other system left still some doubt and had as its main support the old
"simplex veritatis sigillum" (Simplicity is the seal of truth? - The
older version of "Occam's Razor. - J.Z.), which is by no means always
true.
The new system,
accepted by you, by Benjamin R. Tucker, by W. B. Greene and some others - -
your book being the only one still in print and, therefore, of still greater
value than it possesses by its own merits (One can read this in two ways, as a
praise or as a camouflaged criticism! - J.Z.) - - introduces some new
principles.
Cripps and the others think it to be sufficient to modify,
in some way, the economic quantities (prices, wages, exports, imports) and the known
quality's intensities (which are a special kind of quantities)
such as intensity of labour, improvement of popular morals and such things.
The first of your
principles is: The right to divide money-valued claims and to standardise the
divided pieces, so as money (coins) is standardised, is a personal right
just like the right to marry, to keep one's inherited nose - - may it please
others or not - - and to breathe, the denying of such a right being tyrannical
and unworthy of Great Britain's dignity. Further, it is a personal right to
accept such standardised pieces - - formerly named notes - - and to offer them
to any person.
That the principle was recognized as self-evident in the
early days of banking, does not diminish your merit, no more so than
Copernicus' merits are diminished by the fact that Aristarch and others in
antiquity already placed the sun in the middle of the system.
The second of your
principles is: Set aside examples like that of a besieged town (An article in
THE FREEMAN proved that e.g., price control does do harm even there. - J.Z.,
8.2.03) - - in times of peace every imposed restriction of economic freedom,
may it be by private monopoly or by a governmental monopoly, produces more harm
to the community than advantages. Moreover, it is tyrannical and, if forcefully
applied, entitles the coerced to resist.
The first of these
principles is expressly denied but never investigated, the second is simply not
understood, so that average economists and politicians think capitalism
(the word taken in its popular sense) a special application of economic
freedom, although it is, obviously, the contrary.
(J.Z.: It is interesting to see how popular perceptions of
"capitalism" have changed over long periods. Even now few have
realized that a genuine free enterprise and free exchange or free market
"capitalism", one in all spheres,
is still the "unknown ideal", as Ayn Rand wrote in a book by
that title: Capitalism the Unknown Ideal. Moreover, she herself was not
sufficiently consistent in applying free choice and free competition to
subjects like full monetary freedom and "competing governments" but
rather stuck to flawed gold standard and territorialist and limited government
notions only, which would not fully realize free enterprise, free exchange,
individual rights and liberties in these spheres but also put them into forms
of straightjackets. Later B. defined the kind of "capitalism" that
now exists as "a condition that inevitably results when most people do not
bother to take care of their own economic affairs, not just their jobs,
business and personal spending, and are not even interested in them", but
rather leave them to politicians, bureaucrats and other supposed experts, whom
they more or less trust but, alas, not sufficiently distrust to throw them out,
personally and permanently. B. was a kind of voluntary and cooperative
socialist and, at the same time, in some respects, more of a radical free
marketeer and anarcho-capitalist than are most of the modern libertarians. It
is still the common fate of all great pioneers to be all too much misunderstood
by their contemporaries - and even by some of their followers. - J.Z., 8.2.03.)
One may say: What
has all that to do with exports, imports, Dollar scarcity and the need to
supply the country with food?
Our answer: It has
very much to do with that, and if the two principles would have been applied at
the right time, the present problems would not have
arisen.
Further: Anyone, who has constantly before him these two
principles, will judge the problems in another way than he who starts from the
popular economy, where omnipotence of government is considered to be the most
self- evident principle, so that it is never discussed.
All of that may
seem of no immediate application to the discussion of the devaluation
problems, but it applies to the problems and insofar also to
every single problem.
------------------
Mr. Gibson says:
"… and how can he pass an increased price to the consumer, who had
previously failed to purchase at the price (can't read the next word) before
the devaluation?"
If Mr. Gibson's
supposition would be right, his conclusion would be right too. But there are
imported goods which some English buyers must buy, at any price, such as
food, cotton, tobacco and many others. Let me take here the fact, that most smokers
would prefer to reduce their meals rather than to reduce their smoking, as an
economic fact, so that I need not consider it from a more point, which is here
indifferent. (You do know that I don't smoke and am, insofar, not biased
for the smoker. But I judge from what I saw in Germany and what every
English soldier will confirm from the
own experience at numerous occasions during war, when there must be a choice
between food and tobacco.) If the existence of such consumers is admitted, then
it is also admitted that the passing-on of the price increase is no problem for
the. importer.
You, of
course, thought of such consumers, who must pay every price still
economically possible for them. That point of view regarding imports was
insofar justified as a very great part of imports to England consists of goods
absolutely necessary to the consumer. I estimate (but here I may be mistaken),
that the greatest part of imports consists of such goods.
Let me add here
that from 1945 to the first months of 1948 - - before the monetary
"reform" - - the price of coffee in Berlin was sometimes RM 600.- or
so (per pound - J.Z.) (at the free market), that is 3 times more - - about - -
than a monthly income of a worker. I do know of people, who ate nothing for a
whole day only to get the money for a single cup of coffee. Relatives of Indian
and Chinese students sent them one pound of tea monthly, and, by selling
it, the student could easily cover all his expenses and even amuse himself
quite well.
Mr. Gibson asks:
"… supposing I got 100 Dollars for some article, or its equivalent in
Sterling. I now only get 70, Dollars or its equivalent in Sterling - who pays
me the 30 Dollars? No one, my Sterling received for the article is 30 Dollars
less even if I sell more." - Mr. Gibson is right here, also, if his
supposition is right. But: The importer pays 100 Dollars for the
imported article, as he did before the devaluation, and then he demands the
sterling value of $ 100 Dollars
from the consumer (increased by a small loading, in wholesale seldom great) and
is certain to get it. The consumer - - of course - - must now renounce many
other things that he used to buy before - - some imports of less importance,
some of home origin. The first is intended by the government. The latter, it is
hoped, will not occur, with what probability you will estimate from the history
of devaluations, which you know better than I do.
You know also, that the effect may be, that suddenly
so much of the home industry suffers from the confinement of the consumers to
necessities, that there arises much unemployment, while imports are not very
much reduced, that is: much less than the government and its advisors expected.
They should not be surprised if, as a consequence of the devaluation (the people
expect now more devaluations) much more imported jewels are
bought than before and a corresponding quantity of home-made goods remains
unsold at the merchants. There are examples for this.
According to the
investigations of Professor Wagemann on the average time required to restore
the former gold prices after a devaluation, it may be expected that after 2
years = 52 weeks or so, the present price level in Great Britain will rise in
the ratio of 70 to 100, that is about 43%. That is - - as any table of compound
interest teaches - - about 1/3 % a week of the preceding week's price level. It
requires a very skilled statistician to state that from week to week. The
people and the average businessman cannot do that. He is all the more unable to
state the price increase as always some goods decrease in price,
so that in the case of an increase of the price level of 1/3 % about 10 prices
will have decreased and 12 increased. It may also be that 12 prices decrease
and less increase but that the amount of increase is greater than the amount of
decrease. A good textbook will supply any sceptic with the most interesting
examples. The smallness of the increase from week to week eliminates all
economic resistance against the increase of prices.
(We see that in Berlin. Every day some commodity becomes
dearer, yesterday a half pound of salt 23 Pfennig - - before it was 20 Pfennig, The
housewife pays, because the does not need half a pound of salt every day.
Peppermint candies - - yesterday 30 Pfg., before the devaluation 15 Pfg. But
here the merchants did not take into consideration that the buyers are girls
and children, who count the Pfennigs very carefully. I think that in a
week or so peppermints will cost 20 Pfg.)
I beg to note down
all that here, because my impression is that Mr. Gibson overestimates the
difficulty to pass on price increases.
In reality your
opinion does not differ all that much from the opinion of Mr. Gibson. You
spoke of prices of necessary imported goods and he meant goods that the
consumer can dispense with.
Logically your
statement, that, eventually the importer must bear the price increase is
quite right. But - - I think -- there will not be many cases where the importer
is able to bear the difference. The profit margin in wholesale trade is
small, in percentages. I learnt from a Manchester Guardian article, about 20
years ago, that the margin for wheat is 2 %. From so small a margin the
merchant cannot cede a considerable part.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
In the case of
taxes on land-value, the tax will be increased if the value increases. This
value regularly increases (if the increase is not forbidden) when the money is
devalued and the rents are not limited by law. Is then the so produced nominal
increase to be considered as "created by the community", in the sense
in which Henry George used the words? I do hope that Scotch friends of
land-value-taxation - - in the form of a single tax or others - - consider the
problem from that standpoint.
If one has much to
do with the practice of mortgages, then one finds: In the case of an increase
of land value the proprietor at once takes out a mortgage. For the yield of it
he builds. (That provides labour.) But who are the creditors of the mortgage?
In many more cases than 50% - - I estimate at least 80% - - they are persons who
provide for their old age or institutions - - like insurance companies - -
which provide for their customer's old age. So, in practice, the increased land
value helps to assist persons in their old age.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v.
Beckerath.
Here enclosed is Mr.
Gibson's letter. I took a copy.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 28. X.
1949. Bis. (? J.Z.) Your letter of 26.
cr.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
Coal mines.
20 years ago, Rittershausen was in London. (I hope, he visited you.)
When he returned, he told me: Many of England's coal mines are at their end.
What had been expected for decades, has now come to pass. The Mines are
practically exhausted. With every foot of increased depth the technical
difficulties increase in geometrical proportion. There are tendencies to sell
the mines to the government. But the government knows the difficulties quite well
and is not very willing to buy the mines. Some officials said: Let us wait some
years. Then the proprietors are bankrupt and we get these mines gratis. That
was 20 years ago.
In Germany the
worker is paid for the quantity of coal produced by him. He sells the coal to
the proprietor. If he is lazy then this is to his own disadvantage. Under such
a system a decrease of the quantity of coal produced, per man-hour, must be
caused by purely technical causes, for which the worker is not responsible.
-----------------
Wheat. You
say: "…no country outside USA can supply it in the quantity we need".
In "The
Statesman's Yearbook", edition of 1931, page 59, I find these figures:
In 1930 the United
Kingdom imported about 42,261,000 cwt. of wheat from other parts of the Empire
and about 62,746,000 cwt. from foreign countries. The greatest wheat sources
were: United States, 21,076,000 cwt.; Canada,
26,196,000 cwt.; Argentina, 15,205,000 cwt.; Australia, 12,721,000 cwt.
Wheat flour
imported 1930, 11,779, 000 cwt., of which 3,178,000 came from the United
States, 4,492,000 from Canada, and 1,713,000 from Australia.
At page 58 it is
said that in the year 1930 (provisional figures) were imported 103,843,000 cwts
wheat and 11,501,000 cwt. wheat-meal and flour.
Obviously, in the
year 1930 the USA were not yet decisive for England's supply with wheat.
Other countries - - I remember - - complained bitterly bitterly that
England bought -- go little grain from them. Such countries were Romania,
Hungaria and Turkey. The latter was unable to us her vast territories, quite
fit for wheat production, but now in danger of becoming a desert, and would
have preferred to produce wheat for Great Britain.
In the year 1929 Romania
produced 2,714, 848 metric tons of wheat (Statesman's Yearbook, page 1225) =
about 54 Million cwt. (1 metric ton = 19.684 cwt long). In the year 1928
Romania produced 3,551,590 metric tons = about 70 million cwt. Romania could
easily have produced 21 million cwt more wheat - - thus replacing the
USA's part - - if she would have been sure to sell the wheat. But here
lies the rub. Please refer to any economic paper of that time, especially those
of the International Agrarian Institute at Rome. I remember that a little
because Rittershausen, at that time, prepared a study about the possibilities
to increase the food supply of Germany by investing in plants abroad for
watering by artificial rain, with the help of German savings banks. (A plan by
no means utopian; one day it will be executed, if not by Germany than by
another country.)
(Meddle with an old statistician! If my nice statistical
library would not be burned, I could tell you more.)
Offer
Rumania or Hungaria or Turkey to buy wheat and to pay it with bonds, based on
the "acceptance principle" (let me simply call them "Milhaud
bonds"), and they will at once supply you with more wheat than England can
ever eat. (Well, a long-term contract might be advisable for England's annual
wheat requirements. - J.Z., 9.2.03.) Until now nobody offered any wheat
producer payment in Milhaud bonds. Try it, and you and the producers
will be delighted.
Try it, and
a few days later the Dollar Scarcity has disappeared.
(But - - terrible to think this: the monopoly of the
Bank of England to furnish means of payment for external trade would have
disappeared, too. - - "Verstehst
du dieses, Zephyses?" said the old king of the spirits in the old play:
"Der Diamant des
Geisterkönigs".) (Do you understand this, Z.? … "The Diamond
of the Spirit-King". - J.Z.)
--------------------
1 confirm with
1,000 thanks the receipt of:
1.) "Economic Digest, May 1949,
2.) "Truth", of 14. October,
3.) "Economist", 15. October,
4.) "City Press", 14.October,
some containing sensational news.
-----------------
At page 200 of
"Economic Digest" I read, inter alia:
Wheat Equivalent, caloric basis, World's totals: 1947 = 98,
1948 = 112. (Index numbers)
That's a considerable increase. Do you think, that now the
possibility of further increases is exhausted? The answer is
the reduction of arable land under cultivation in the USA for 1950. Already
there is a shortage of eaters. Malthusians do not know what to do: Either
be pleased about how much food is now available - - for those with means of
payment - - or be sorry about their failing prophesies.
------------------
From the
"Courrier de France" I take the news that the French would be able to
transform the whole French Sphere in North Africa into a very large grain
producing area, but the problem remains here as anywhere else: How to sell the
grain? France herself is satisfactorily supplied, which I read from the latest
edition of the "Courrier de France". Prices are even falling, so that
the peasants demand subsidies.
-------------------
You know the saying
of King Philipp of Macedonia: "A gold-laden jackass finds his way into the
best-watched town. He overcomes even the highest walls." Today he would
have said: A gold-valued Milhaud Bond finds its way through the Iron Curtain,
to Romania, Hungary and Russia herself. For such Bonds - Stalin would rather
let all Russians go hungry and would supply England with grain. (He is right.
[In his appreciation of such clearing certificates. - J.Z.] Try it!)
-----------------
I read Bevan's
Speech at the Devaluation session. Such an impressive speaker!!! And he's a
character - - a charlatan can't speak so. Bevan would be a prop for the present
government if he could not speak so well - - really reminding of
Demosthenes and Cicero.
(At the first
speech of Robespierre all deputies laughed, for every man saw that it
was his first speech in a great assembly. One man did not
laugh - - Mirabeau. Asked by his friends why he was so earnest at such an
amusing occasion, he replied: Oh, my friends, do you not see, that the man believes
all he says? I fear him more than all others.)
(Nonsense combined with excellent rhetoric and uttered with conviction
is really a great threat! - J.Z., 9.2.03.)
------------------
Please, do read the
article: "Optimum Population" in the 1947 edition of the
Encyclopaedia Britannica. It is very short but disproves many volumes of the
"New Generation"
Very
faithfully Your - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, ….
29. X.
1949.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
it is your opinion that Christ's recommendation in Matthew
5, 39 - - do not resist offences - - belongs to the Christian Ethics. You are
insofar in the right, as all books on ethics, written by Christians, take the
same view. Also all priests of the Christian Churches will here agree with you.
But I cannot agree, saying with old Abaelard:
"Si omnes
patres sic, ego non sic."
Nevertheless, I do think that we differ here not so much as
it may seem at first sight.
Take any year from
the year zero to the year 1949 and estimate: How many persons may have lived in
that year and have seriously acknowledged that principle? How many have really
offered the left cheek, is they were slapped on the right? More than 1,000?
You doubt it? I do to. And is it not true, that all those, not belonging to
that trifling minority, do hold in contempt all those who did not in any
way resist the invaders? Would the most Christian king have permitted a judge
or a soldier or any of his officials to obey the principle and not resist an
invader?
Further: If a thief would have come one night to steal the
fish caught by Petrus, would any man in the world believe that Petrus then
spoke thus to the thief: Oh - - wait a bit - - you shall get my net, too!!!
In other words, the
principle was taken serious by almost nobody and those, who did take it
serious, were boycotted by the other Christians.
That admitted, nobody can say that the principle formed, at
any time, a part of Christian Ethics. When Christian authors pretend the
contrary, and all of them do, they do either lie or do not know what they say.
If Nietzsche of any other would have asserted that the principle formed a part of Christian
Ethics, then he was not careful enough in his criticism. (Very often he
was not careful enough.)
The question arises
whether Christ himself intended to recommend such a principle. Christ was
obviously a man whose religious thinking was far above that of the level of his
time. It would be unjust to reproach him that he did not yet find out, what
1,700 years later David Hume and Kant found out, under conditions much more
favourable than the conditions for religious critics at the time of Christ.
The whole passage
from verse 31 deals with matters of law. He demanded from his adherents that
they do not apply to a court for divorce. He demanded that the courts be
refused an oath in the legal and prescribed forms. He protested against the
fundamental principle of the Jewish justice system, which was the jus
retalionis. (An immense progress at that old time, where the avenger was not
bound to any limits for his revenge, and, on the other side, had the right to
renounce revenge for a trifling sum of money.)
He recommended avoiding the courts and to try to come to an
agreement with adversaries.
The apostles, in their letters, underlined this point of
view, and I think that you know the passages.
The true sense of what he meant, seems to me expressed in
verse 25 and Luke 12, 58.
The verse 39 is obviously altered and corrupted, as are so
many dozen others.
(Gibbon relates edifying stories about the mutual reproaches
of Christian sects and churches, for having falsified the scriptures. A
celebrated falsification is that of Matthew 5, 3, where it is said that the
spiritually poor are blessed, while in Luke 6, 20 the real text is preserved,
where Christ simply speaks of the poor. Some old bourgeois added
"spiritually".)
The behaviour of
Christ justifies my theory. (I hope it will not only be mine. The theory very
much suggests itself.)
At his trial one of
the beadles (church servants - J.Z.) beats Christ. (Luke 22,64, John 18, 22.)
In no case offered Christ the other cheek. John reports that, on the contrary,
he protested and in a manner no less dignified than courageous. The words about
the two cheeks are an oriental expression which none of his listeners
misunderstood.
And then the
cleaning of the temple, which all 4 evangelists report. Here Christ not only
did not resist but executed a real charge against his adversaries. Here as well
he displayed much courage and even robust strength.
From Christ's
ethics we possess only corrupted fragments, not sufficient to restore Christ's
real doctrine! What today passes under the name of Christian Ethics has not
much to do with Christ's actual teachings.
-------------------
100 years in the
future Free Banking will be acknowledged as a religion. And the
theologians of that religion will prove,
that the main reason for which Christ attacked the Banks of the temple
was that these Banks were obviously not founded on the Free Banking
principle, which, in such a holy milieu really must be considered as a mortal
sin.
Insofar Christ is here also justified.
----------------
I do hope that you
will now be convinced!
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
30. X. 1949. Your letter of 20.
cr., received 23. cr.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
there are several "movements" for Scotch Independence and some of them - - that
is my impression from a little article in "Truth" - go very far
beyond the sympathetic aims of Mr. Gibson. G. demands a kind of economic and
monetary home-rule, whose advantages would be for England no less important
than for Scotland. Gibson will not separate Scotland in toto from the British
Commonwealth, but others will, for reasons much inferior to those for which
Ireland (de facto - - not formally) separated.
Let me here observe
that many Cosmopolites (Cosmopolitan members of the Cosmopolitan Union of
Werner Ackermann - J.Z.) considered the former British Commonwealth as the
beginning of that international power which Kant expected to come, and
to develop into a Union willing and able to maintain "eternal peace"
or - - expressed less mystically - - to suppress wars of the old style. (Neither Kant nor - - as far as I know - -
anyone else tackled the problem to suppress civil wars like the American of
1861/65 and the many others of that kind in England, France, Germany, China
(especially China), Japan and elsewhere.)
Kant said: The creation of such a power is the aim of
nature itself, and men aid nature here, although with no more consciousness
then the corals do, which build atolls, the latter being nature's aim and the
corals merely the tools.
For what purpose nature wants such a power we do not know,
but an impartial look at nature's work lets us recognise that the tendency
exists. I share Kant's views.
And now you may understand for what a crime I consider the
present and the former government's acts by which India was delivered up to the
"300,000 Indian Intellectuals", (among them at least 299 000 sheep
heads), by which South Africa was permitted to create a colour bar, which gets
much applause in Alabama and Missouri, but gave the Indian "leaders"
the moral force to create that "independence movement" and prevented
China from becoming a voluntary and true member of the Commonwealth.
Suppose a new
Robert Bruce succeeds in separating Scotland from Great Britain. What would be
the economic and, monetary effect? The first would be, that Bruce creates a
Scotch monopoly bank that issues monopoly notes. Bruce would consider these
notes as being as valuable as gold and would, therefore, prohibit the export of
these precious papers. Every Scotch journal would defend the measure and would
"prove" its necessity to supply Scotland with means of payment. To
those, who demanded the restoration of the condition before 1844 would be
answered, that at then "culture" was not yet as developed as today,
people read classics instead of listening to the radio and wrote letters - -
many still worth reading - - that's true - - instead of telephoning. People who
do not believe in the progress performed by Bruce would be sent to a
concentration camp and all papers would congratulate Bruce for his energy,
patriotism and restoring the "unity of public opinion". The
import-export problem would be exactly the same as now for Great Britain. To
the Scots would be preached: Let no export come in from England to Scotland
before the English Pounds to pay them are ready and the latter can
"obviously" be done only if beforehand Scotland's exports are
permitted to come into England. A Scot, who travels to London and pays there
the hotel-bill with a Scotch note, would be considered as acting
unpatriotically. It may be, that he merely amuses himself in London, but the
hours of work which London - - acting in this case for England - - expends to
amuse the Scotch, cannot be considered as a delivery of goods to Scotland, as
would be the case in an import.
(Why not? They, prudently, do not reply, because they don't
know it themselves.)
In other words: The old Soviet system of trade would be
introduced and the whole world would admire it.
And all that would
be nonsense because
I. ) If the future system of Bruce would be
reasonable, then it would also be reasonable now, and not only in the
trade between England and Scotland, but also in the trade between London and
Dover and even between Wimbledon and Wandsworth. (In 1848 merchants of Berlin
framed a "cahier" in which the subdividing of Berlin into economic
spheres was demanded and an obligation for every inhabitant to buy at the
stores in the street where he resided.)
II.) If the present system is superior to the
"zone-system", then it remains superior if one part of the country
gets another flag, its policemen another uniform and the man who
"plans" for his fellow-citizen is replaced by two men, whose
combined successes are of no greater advantage for their fellow-citizens
than was before the success of the one
man - and for the same reason: Two milked oxen yield no more milk than to one.
And now let us
consider the export-import-problem of Great-Britain from that standpoint
and let us not forget that if Jeanne d'Arc would not have interrupted the sound
political development in Western Europe, so that without her intervention today
Paris would be an English town (or London a French one), and further, if the
English government in 1776 would have
granted some quite unimportant concessions to the Americans, that then the
whole problem would not exist and there would be one great empire from
San Francisco to Lowestoft and from the Orkneys to Marseille at least
To Jeanne d'Ars
applies what Goethe said:
"Was die Weiber
lieben und hassen, (What women love
and hate
"Das wollen wir
ihnen gelten lassen: One should
concede to them,
"Wenn sie aber
urteilen und meinen, But if they
judge and opine,
"Da will's oft
wunderlich erscheinen." Then
that will often appear to be curious. [miraculous?] - J.Z.)
But: to be
impartial: If Christina of Sweden, Gustav Adolph's noble daughter, would not
have meant that there were enough men killed and ordered her
government to make peace, Germany would have had a 50 or even 100- years war
instead of a 30-years war and would have been reduced from 25 millions
inhabitants in 1618 not to 5 millions in 1648 but perhaps to 1 million or less
in 1660 or so. (Is the book: The Role of Women in Politics" already
written?)
Suppose: An
Englishmen travels from Dover to Calais, drinks there a bottle of wine, pays
for it with a pound note and returns. The inn-keeper says: What do I do with
the pound note? The shops of Calais don't accept it - - I must spend it
in England, if I can't find anyone, to whom I can sell it and who then spends
the English money in England. Well - - I
know what to do - - I'll send the note to the Biro firm and I ask them to send
to me one of their magnifique, useful Biro Pens, without the thicker
down-stroke. ("Gleichschaltung" is the parole of the time - - why not
in the strokes of writing too???)
What is now the
effect? English labour is exchanged for French labour. The quantity of labour
is equal or may be supposed to be equal. The form of the business is of a kind
that the exchange must take place, provided the French accept English
money. What can be objected from an economist's standpoint?
From the standpoint
of Cobden, Herbert Spencer, Jevons and Adam Smith nothing can be
objected. But from a modern
standpoint, that of a Keynes, Sir
Stafford Cripps, and such people the thing is very different. They will object:
I.) This kind of trade offends our mentality. State,
authorities, banks as money suppliers and the advice of experts such as
we are, is here quite eliminated. That should not be.
II.) The monopoly of the Bank of England to supply the
external trade with means of payment is here violated.
III.) A control of what is useful external
trade is not possible if free trade - - as in the example - - prevails. But we
like to decide what should be introduced into England in return for
Biro's pens.
IV.) Schacht proclaimed the principle (which he
borrowed from the Soviets): First export. Thus win foreign exchange and then
you may - - if I think it
necessary - - import and pay for the import with the foreign exchange earned.
We - - Keynes, Cripps, Bevans, etc. - - accepted the principle and our
brains require much effort to learn new things. Others have to use their brains
to apply our system to their affairs!
Forcing foreigners to by our goods by the system of the
example, namely: "Let Englishmen buy at libitum any foreign goods with
means of payment of English origin, and let it then be the foreigner's worry
to get the equivalent - - after all, they do have the means of payment in hand
and they do know where these means are accepted as money - - " -
-would mean too much new learning on our side. Therefore, the system must
be forbidden.
(For many years the Soviets have abandoned the system. They
may be human tigers, but they are no blockheads in economics.)
Rittershausen told
me some time ago: The old economic aristocracy in all countries used the
Malthusian principle and now has attained its aim: It is extinct. The employees, book-keepers,
errand-boys, cashiers and such people are now in the business, to which they
brought their mentality of subordinate and obedient men, who remain
employees also as department-chiefs. These people govern us. But nature has
destined them and their offspring not to govern (although they may be
good department-chiefs) but to obey and be guided. It may require
centuries before a new race of real merchants arises.
Schacht is a governing book-keeper - - no fool blockhead - -
by no means - - but of political economy he understands no more than an average
sergeant understands tactics and strategy. That is true, although he may know
by heart 50 modern text books of political economy.
(J.Z.: Regarding modern economic textbooks and handbooks on
inflation and unemployment: One can go through at least dozens, if not hundreds
or even thousands of them before one finds one that sees the connection between
inflation and legal tender and deflation and the issue monopoly. This was a
hint given to me by B. and I tried it out, repeatedly, first during a large
book exhibition and since in many libraries and bookshops - and found it
confirmed, again and again. Seeing all these text contain already these 2 very
basic and important flaws, how many other flaws are they likely to contain?
Thus most of them deserve to be ignored. Most bring a formal definition of
legal tender and of the note issue monopoly - but without comprehension and
exposition of their implications and awareness of the terrible disasters they
have made possible. - For me that is the "Schopenhauer-Test" for most
economic textbooks. - J.Z., 10.2.03.)
--------------
Many will say: But
the foreigners will not accept Sterling Means of Payment. They distrust
the Sterling. Perhaps that is true, after Sir Stafford Cripps denied 9
times his intention to devaluate and now is suspected of not having told the
truth nine times. (A governmentally monopolised and mismanaged paper money
deserves every suspision! - J.Z., 10.2.03.) But foreigners will accept Dollar-notes
of British origin at the value of a really free exchange market - - say that of
New York, notes by which no (rare metal - J.Z.) redemption is promised but
merely their acceptance in the "Zahlungsverkehr" (the dictionaries do
not translate the word) (international payment and clearing transactions?
Literally: payment transactions. - J.Z.) of the issuers.
And if then anyone says: Also such means of payment
of British origin will not be accepted by foreigners, the I answer: I will
believe that after such means of payment are formally declined and this not by
mere writers of papers but by real firms and businessmen.
(J.Z.: Alas, most of these share the economic prejudices of
the official "experts", but not all of them. From the few, who would
there see new business opportunities for themselves, and from their experience
with optional alternative and private means of exchange and clearing, also with
alternative and freely chosen value standards, this knowledge and experience
would rapidly spread, even if, initially, such actions are still and often
coercively suppressed and punished. - Many do already strive now to achieve
alternative payment options through the Internet. But most are still tied in
their notions to metal redemptionism, rather than realising the "pure
clearing" facility thus provided.
And the others are insufficiently informed about the extent and the
limits of "shop-foundation" or the "readiness-to-accept-foundation." They have notions of rather supplying new
alternative international means of payment to others than letting them or
helping them supply their means of payment and clearing themselves, obliging
only themselves thereby, and using the technological avenues of the
"inventors" of "electronic money" only as channels for the
circulation of their goods warrants and clearing certificates. - The electronic
channel providers should concentrate on that, and the security of their
channels and should offer optional value standards for transactions through
their channel and be also open-minded towards the introduction of new ones
between consenting exchange partners. - J.Z., 10.2.03.)
----------------
But very probably
the "acceptance-Bills" (Milhaud-Bills) are prohibited by the
foreign-exchange-control laws of governments. The present of providing money
for external trade subdues the country more than despotism of the old style,
say by Louis XIV. did subdue it and lets political freedom become - - in
practice - - no larger than it pleases the monopolists and their
"Hintermaenner".
(J.Z.: B. suggested "hintermen" here, a literal
translation. What is meant are the "powers behind the throne" or the
"men ruling behind the scenes", the powerful manipulators, who keep
in the background, out of the spotlights. But some are impertinent enough to
put themselves forward as experts, e.g. Cripps and Keynes, offering all their
wrongful and false advice as the highest possible knowledge and wisdom. - J.Z.,
10.2.03)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
You speak of trade
deficits. And you are right, I did not reply to all your arguments as they
deserve. But that is your own fault. The points you dealt with in your letters
were so important and interesting that better economists than I would have
shrunk away from them.
Some decades ago a
German economist amused himself and his readers with a new kind of statistics.
He added the import numbers furnished by all trade statistics, from the
earliest times and added the export figures as well, confronting them. He
commented: In the world's commerce there is no balance of trade. No
country presents gifts to other countries, in goods, services or claims.
If the commercial statistics were exact, the sum of all imports must equal the
sum of all exports, perhaps not in every year, but certainly in every decade.
It must even be equal at every moment, provided all claims are exactly included.
Example: England grants China a loan. Then there will appear
in the commercial statistics an export from England to China but no equivalent
export from China to England or to such countries which export in their turn to
England. Some years later, when China repays the loan, the reverse will be
observed. But the balance will be at every moment zero, if the claims
are duly included.
Alas, this and
other such surveys and arguments remained without effect. For each year
the commercial statistics seemed to prove that the imports of the whole world
surpassed the exports. That in economically impossible and proves the some
flaws of the statistics. (They were already pointed out by Bastiat! - J.Z.) What
may have been and still is the true cause of this inaccuracy has been the
subject of controversies. For our discussion it in at the moment not important.
A similar
observation could be made at the inflation time in Germany, Austria and other
countries which suffered from Inflation. (Or, as English papers at that time
said, which profited from inflation at the expense of those, who retained an
honest money.)
In the case of Germany it seemed as if Germany imported
enormous quantities of foreign goods and exported
very few. At that time I had an occasion to talk with one of
the largest Hamburg importers. (His name was Schlubach, then known in the whole
world for his very superior commercial qualities, absolute honesty and the
great authority which he - - quite rightly - - enjoyed in all commercial
circles. He paid his employees better than any other firm in Hamburg.)
Schlubach was an adherent of the usual balance of trade theory. He gave me the
later published figures from which one might see, that the balance of trade was
very much against Germany. I could not
help considering the matter also from a mathematical
point of view and replied modestly to Schlubach, that if the figures were true,
then there must be people in Germany, who were debtors of the foreigners
to the tune of many dozens of millions. Who - I asked him - are these
people? Do you know their names? I do not have to know them and I will be
content if you tell me: I know these people! Schlubach could simply have
said: Well - - I know the names; but he was a man of the old Hamburg honesty
and would rather have paid me 1,000 Dollars in specie than to tell me the least
lie. He told me openly, that he knew no such people, who enjoyed credits to the
extent that was here in question. He added, that he himself could get much
credit from abroad. But at that time the business was performed in a way that
the commodities were transported to Germany, remained in the custody of
reliable concerns like Schlubach, but also as the property of the foreigners.
If some quantity of these foreign goods was sold, Schlubach sent the equivalent
abroad, in most cases German commodities. There never remained a real balance
of considerable amount. But often Schlubach become debtor of German factories,
who sent him commodities, in his case mostly (or
frequently) railway supplies, also locomotives and railway equipment for
Argentina. For the German factories it was a profitable thing. They built the
locomotives with credits from
the Reichsbank given in Papermark and debited Schlubach in
Dollars. After 3 or 6 month they repaid the Reichsbank credit received (worth
then some boxes of matches) and got from Schlubach the Dollars he owed.
In the year 1926 I
had some business in Paris, and there the French told me, that if at the Champs
Elysées a very elegant auto was to be seen, then people usually said:
Hein - - encore un allemand!
The result of my
meeting with Schlubach was: The statistics were not reliable, and after my
discussion they did not seem reliable even to Schlubach.
(J.Z.: The unreliability of the statistics I readily
concede. But here a factor may have played a role which B. did not explore
above. Foreigners may have accepted the already inflated Reichsmark for all too
long, merely upon its old reputation - Meulen's "trust", which had
lasted for several decades, as if it had still been the old Reichs-Goldmark and
may have been insufficiently aware of its diminished and almost constantly
diminishing purchasing power in Germany. Thus, they may have sold much and
relatively cheaply (reckoned in gold value) to Germany, but with the inflated
Reichsmarks thus obtained, they, or their importers, could have bought little
in Germany. Even in Germany, where it was happening, the inflation, its cause
and effect, were noted only belatedly and initially only by very few. Price
rises were ascribed to everything else but the real cause. Foreigners would
have been even less informed on this. So they miscalculated in their exports
and imports, in the pricing of their goods in paper Reichsmark. Probably they
had also foreign exchange controls, so that not they but their central bank
suffered. Anyhow, this aspect might explain large imports of goods and small
exports for the Germany at that time. Many foreigners or their central bank
ended up with little purchasing power in return for their exports. Finally they
got wise and altogether discounted the paper Reichsmark greatly or refused it
altogether and insisted in being paid in their own currency. Then this
condition was legalized, as if it were always economically necessary or advisable.
At a later stage of the inflation this relationship was reversed. Foreigners
buying with their relatively stable currency in Germany were at a great
advantage. With a few and relatively stable US dollars or Sterling Pounds etc.,
foreigners could buy very much and very cheaply in Germany, thus exports rose,
while Germans could buy very little, if anything, in foreign countries, with
their inflated paper Reichsmark, thus imports greatly declined. - J.Z.,
10.2.03.)
And now I ask you:
Do you really believe in the commercial statistics????????? A statistician
trusts in a statistics only if he, who compiled it, stands with his name for it
and says openly how he compiled it and gives samples of the material
from which he took his numbers. Who is the debtor of the negative
balance of the English trade? I am convinced that such debtors do not exist, at
least not more so and not indebted more than in the year 1913.
I beg to call to
your attention to the following fact. If a country like England exports goods,
which only an expert can properly price, like chemicals, textiles, optical
instruments, etc. it is easy and the usual method to value them for a fraction
of the real value, simply to save custom duty. I know enough examples from my
own experience, and I would be surprised, if a man, so connected with
commercial circles as you are, would not know many more examples. Import goods,
such as England imports them, grain, flour, cotton, meat, wool, etc. can also
be valued by average custom officials. But manufactured goods can be properly
priced only by a few experts. Moreover, it is well known that in countries like
the USA, and much more in others, the custom officials are very susceptible to
bribery. In Russia, at the time of the Tsars - - as every voyageur knew - - the
custom officials were Circassians. The Russian government had found out the
Islamic religion of the Circassians, together with the inborn nobility of the
Circassian character made them immune to bribery while the most pious Christian
Russian, for a few Rubles, would let pass every desired quantity through the
customs at the rate the other party wished.
(So the honest Circassians helped the Russian government in
its robberies, while the dishonest Russian officials resisted them, well, to
their own advantage, too. - J.Z., 10.2.03.)
Under similar conditions the balance of trade of every
country (exporting manufactured goods and importing food and raw materiel),
inevitably seems passive.
To confirm the foregoing, you will know better than I do,
the events which induced the Chinese emperor to entrust the customs not to his Chinese but to a man
like Sir Robert Hart. It any one would have offered him a ship loaded with gold
as a bribe, he would have smiled kindly and then have the briber arrested. By
his administration of the customs,
Imperial China became the best and most trustworthy debtor of the world. How
the affairs were conducted after the dismissal of the foreigners from service
in Chinese customs - you will know.
Summary:
I.) England's balance of trade is active,
II.) The opinion that only the USA are able to furnish food
to England is quite unfounded. The same countries which before supplied food
etc. to England will do it now, if payment is offered in Milhaud Bonds - - with
the latter being the only thing that must be introduced as an innovation. After
a few weeks this innovation will be recognised as a great improvement, in
England and abroad.
----------------
The present system
of payment must bring the most flourishing trade to a standstill - after a few
years.
That you
always demanded:
Merchants should
not depend upon a monopoly bank for conducting their trade - - and that not only in their own
interest, but in the interest of the whole country - that has now, by
the present situation, proven to be an absolute necessity.
England's future
depends upon realising your demand.
Under the present system Malthus will always seem
to be in the right, and always the quantity of available food will seem
to be too small, even if England were reduced to one million inhabitants.
Under your system the whole of Great Britain may grow
into a single town and there will be more food available than the inhabitants
can eat. Your system merely waits to be applied and it will transform,
in a few years, the African bush into grain-producing fields and the Amazonas
swamps into the greatest garden of the world - - supplying many hundreds of
millions with food - - as already Alexander von Humboldt predicted.
If you continue to
underestimate your own system, laid down in an admirable book and in so many
articles in The Individualist, you will simply commit a sin.
"Nur die Lumpe
sind bescheiden" said old Goethe.
("Only the beggars are modest." - B. always tried to motivate
others by praising them, often to excess. Meulen's monetary system had severe
flaws. Only if it had been introduced in free competition with other free
banking systems would it have done little harm and would have vanished after a
while, replaced by better ones. - J.Z.)
Day by day the
Russian army increases by 4,000 trained soldiers. England's army does not
increase. You (and nobody else but you) can provide the means to
create - - in the long run an army like the Russian. Do it!!!
(J.Z.: Free Banking in England could provide conditions
there, which would make military defence largely unnecessary. For foreign
soldiers, told to fight England, would rather desert and freely work there than
fight against England. And then such deserters or refugees would be invited and
welcomed with open arms, as helpers to increase the standard of living in
England even further - and could and
would be told how to introduce the same conditions in Russia as well. - It
would have been a country in which every hard working "proletarian"
could have become relatively rich, rather fast, the capitalistic and
free-market and cooperative way, thus deflating all State socialist and
communist pretences. By comparison, the Soviet system would have been generally
seen as a great flop - by almost everyone, every Russian conscript and civilian
victim included. The few remaining communists would be asked: Who are the
"exploited" in England, seeing that even the lowest employed or
cooperators have a multiple of our income and that England has no longer
colonies, which were, presumably exploited [also more fantasy than reality],
but simply trades freely with all the world? The morale of the Red Army would
have evaporated as far as England etc. was concerned - but would have risen in
strength against the Soviet regime. In material and manpower resources
"military strength" also means a great economic burden and it was one
which the Soviet "planned" economy could at last no longer bear. The
most strict "military discipline" in the world is not a sufficient
help to a ruler when the other side offers each of its victims a much better
deal, individually, also as far as any rightful national, racial, religious,
ideological or other desired liberation is concerned. It is not impossible or
difficult to offer all conscripts, professional soldiers and civilian subjects
of a dictator a much better deal, ideas and programme than their dictator
offers them. Nevertheless, the attempt is rarely made, because our rulers have
monopolised this sphere, too and their governmentalism is not all that much
better that it is quite obvious to almost everyone. They still consider
immigrants and refugees a problem rather than as an unappreciated and unused
great resource, for benefit of the host country as well as for the refugees and
immigrants themselves. - J.Z., 10.2.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
When judging the
present situation a philosophical truth - - seldom noticed - - must be
observed. One can always connect any
effect to any pretended cause by interpolating a sufficient number of logical
links, the one dependent upon the other, each logical link itself being very
probable.
Suppose, an effect
depends upon a pretended cause with a probability of 95 % - - which average men cannot distinguish from
certainty. Suppose further, that the cause depends upon another pretended
cause, also with a probability of 95 %. Then the whole probability is already
reduced to 0.95 x 0.95 = 0.9025. Adding another logical link with the same
probability reduces the whole probability to 0.95 x 0.95 x 0.95 = 0.857375. To average people the probability
is brought to nearly three times confirmed certainty, because in their minds
they add
(unconsciously) the probabilities and get: 0.95 + 0.95 + 0.95 = 2.85.
By 90 links, linked
together as before, the final probability is brought down to 0.00988836, that
is less than one percent. Average people get the impression that here a truth
is demonstrated, with certainty, 90 times confirmed.
Often I was tempted
to work out examples from present economic discussions. But: time, time, time!!
----------------
(Salt
marshes??? Essex???? Caravans???? I went
at once to the British Information Centre to look for these things in the
Encyclopaedia Britannica - - but it does not contain an article "salt
march of Essex" and also does not mention the thing either under
"salt" or under "Essex".
- But I see, that your health has now improved. The Demiurgos of our
universe department gives humanity a new change.)
-------------
Jevons, in
his admirable "Theory of Political Economy" introduced there a new
notion: Commercial body", by which he emancipates himself and his
adherents (to whom I belong) from the old and not decisive notions
"mutual" and "owned and guided by a single person", in the
notion "commercial body".
The customers of a Mutual Bank and those of a Bank guided,
as old Scotch Banks were, both form a "commercial body". The legal
shape is perhaps not of primary importance. May both legal systems
compete!
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 4. XI. 1949. Your letter of 18. X. 49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
Mr. C. V. Drysdale, President of the Malthusian League, just published a very
interesting pamphlet: "The scientific path to peace and
prosperity."
Mr. D., like Malthus himself, is a strong opponent to
reforms of the social system (page 7), and from his
standpoint this is a quite logical consequence. Mr. D. says
about such reforms:
"… but Malthus
felt compelled to oppose them on the ground that they would remove all
deterrents to early marriages and lead to such a rapid increase of population as would soon
result in universal destitution.
If Malthus and Mr.
D. were in the right, then you, who is now at the top of social reformers (always
butter them up? - J.Z., 11.2.03.), deserve More blame than all others, seeing
that they are not going as far as you do. Let me
here remind you, that the revolutionaries mentioned by Mr.
D., Rousseau, Karl Marx, Henry George and Prince Kropotkin did not conceive the
idea of emancipating mankind from the present money monopoly, neither from the
quasi-monopoly by the relative scarcity of gold and silver nor from the
artificial one that confines the right of note-issue to the State or State
banks.
But here must be mentioned your most important discovery,
that non-convertible certificates, standardised as money is, are not prohibited
in England.
(Something that M. did not consider to be of importance and
in which he was, most likely, quite wrong! - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
Possibly here lie, still hidden, immense social reforms,
provided people can be found to utilise this freedom opportunity.
In Germany even those bonds in small denominations are
severely prohibited now which were, 60 years ago, issued by every little shop
and accepted by them for their nominal value in payments. Similar laws exist
now in nearly all countries, Russia included, where also certified cheques of
cooperatives are prohibited as a violation of the Central Bank's means of
payment monopoly.
The breaking of the
modern money monopoly would be - - although possibly quite bloodless, and more:
possibly escaping the attention of the masses - - a social revolution of much
greater consequences than the simple transformation of private capitalism into
State capitalism, as in Russia, which you pointed out in your
publications. The quantity of blood
shed for social changes and the mass of property changing hands in revolutions
proves nothing for the importance of the
change as a system.
One day sociology will confirm the most radical influence:
The breaking of the money monopoly. It still has to discover what you found out more than thirty
years ago, that the monetary conditions of society are that factor which, more
than any other, influences all relations of man to man, of man to the State, of
man to the means of production and of man to the social product and its just
distribution. I regret that not all friends of the present system are
informed that this system was demanded by the 27 years old Karl Marx in the
first German edition of the Communist Manifesto - as a good start for
Communism, even if the Communist Revolution must be postponed. That was in the
year 1847. Marx was quite right.
Mr. D. says, that
his present views are the outcome of fifty years of earnest study. The
earnestness of his studies every critic must confirm, who reads the pamphlet
impartially. But, obviously, Mr D. preferred, during these 50 years, other
studies than those in the theory of political economy. That's pity, for the
population problems belong first of
all to those studying political economy, although they seem to belong
more to agronomy and the physiology of plants, beasts and men.
Mr. D. is excused, as even scientists like Darwin, who
confessed himself to be a Malthusian, did not become aware that none of the
problems investigated by him, not even the "struggle for life", have
to do with an asserted greater increase of the population of man than his means
of subsistence. (Descent of Man, 2nd edition, page 607.)
The struggle of
life is carried on against all kinds of resistance and, in the case of man,
especially against the resistance of the beasts of prey, i.e.., against being
killed, as long as men are hunters. But man himself is no beast of prey for
other men, as are beasts of the chase, not even there where cannibalism
prevails. The purely religious nature of cannibalism is now generally
acknowledged and also that it never contributed any essential part to the diet.
If the immense material, collected in the last decades about cannibalism, had
been accessible to Darwin, then he would have been the first to draw from it
the right conclusion and, probably he, whom no naturalist surpassed in
impartiality and sagacity, would have discovered there things still unknown.
(J.Z.: The following few lines, here given literally and in
brackets, were crossed out by B. I reproduce them as indicating his line of
thought. - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
(The fight against
human and other robbers was in early days of mankind, what concerns the
problems of overpopulation in the sense of Malthus, after hunting as a normal
kind of production of food had been abandoned, not essential. That robber
tribes were induced to their robberies not by lack of food, but in first line
by their notions of a warriors honour is clearly seen from)
Some Malthusians
represented the "hunting period" of mankind and the present
conditions of hunting tribes as a proof for Malthus' theories. But from this
age and of these tribes no facts are known that are favourable to Malthus'
theories, although the human hunting activity immediately decreases the
quantity of available food. The situation for man is much changed by passing
from hunting to stock-breeding and still much more by passing to agriculture.
Here the food can be and is regularly increased far above
the quantity really needed to maintain production. That is proven by the history of luxury from the
remotest to modern times. At the court of the old Persian kings about 15,000
persons did service in the royal household. The fact that even with antique
tools one man doing agriculture work is able to sustain about 9 persons was
well known - and recklessly misused.
World's history
hands down no record that men died of hunger or had to suffer hunger merely for
the reason that their number was too great, excepted cases where the community
did not enjoy free trade, that is: no free or good communications; or the
government or the ruling classes restrained production or the free exchange
between agriculture and industry, both foreign and domestic.
To conceive the
importance of political and social conditions for the food supply, one might
imagine that the Earth would be populated only by three men, one of them being
the proprietor, but unwilling or too stupid to use the labour of the two
proletarians. Then the earth would seem terribly overpopulated and a deadly
competition between the two would arise.
Prof. Edwin
Cannan, internationally recognised as one of the most able economists of
our time, worked out a new scientific basis of the theory of population, one
very different from old Malthusianism, but -- it seems - - accepted by some of the more
progressive Malthusians. (Example: "Plenty of People", by Warren S.
Thompson, Lancaster, Pa. 1944.) - In an excellent article in the Encyclopaedia
Britannica, 1947 edition, "Optimum population", the Director of the
London School of Eonomics, Alexander Morris Carr-Saunders, refers to Cannan's
investigations and for further information to L. Robbins, "The Optimum
Theory of Population", in "London Essays in Honour of of Edwin
Cannan" (1927). Obviously, Cannan's discoveries escaped Mr. D.
Carr-Saunders says inter alia:
"The optimum
theory of population ... was not held by Malthus or by the elder authors, who
discussed the population problem. It was their failure to formulate this
theory, which robs their treatment of much of its value. This conception lies
at the basis of the position now taken by all authorities, may be briefly
expressed as follows …. If population is at the optimum number, the greatest
return per head possible under the circumstances will be attained. Departure
from the optimum, whether in the direction of deficiency or excess, will be
accompanied by a return per head less than the possible return. Etc."
I state that your
standpoint never differed from Cannan's, although there might have been, in
special cases, a difference between adherents of Cannan and you about the
probable optimal number of inhabitants in certain countries.
Cannan's and your
views (I believe M. would have denied that they were his. B. left him an
honourable way out. - J.Z., 11.02.03.) lead to another interpretation of
history than the interpretation given by Malthus. Take Great Britain as an
example. In the year 1798, when Malthus published his book, Great Britain was
inhabited by less than 10 million people. Malthus asserted that the country be
overpopulated and was convinced that the misery and the hunger prevailing among
the lower classes were caused by a mis-proportion between the number of
inhabitants
and the quantity of available food, a situation which he
believed to be practically incurable. Today Great Britain produces from her own
soil food for about 30 million people and, in spite of rationing, these 30
millions are, probably, better nourished
than were, in the average, the contemporaries of Malthus. Obviously, 150 years
ago, Great Britain was considerably under-populated. Until the year 1815 she
was so under-populated, that the government granted a bounty to those who exported
grains, seeing no other way to get rid of the surplus of food.
(At the times of Defoe, the government hoped to use the
surplus - - to avoid destroying it - - by favouring the fabrication of gin, which
at that time, and intentionally, was very lightly taxed. For reasons that every
one might have expected, the system was later abandoned. In the year 1751 a
high tax was laid on spirits and its retailing
by shopkeepers and distillers was stopped. - English Social History by
G. M. Trevelyan, 4th edition,
1947.)
Not before 1846 were the corn laws of 1815 repealed.
Also, it was one of the most common sayings at the time of
Malthus, and is still sometimes used rightly, that in England and in every year
many more people die from eating too much than die by starvation.
Although Malthus
proved himself to be a bad observer in practical population questions, one must
not underestimate him and I think you treated him with all respect in all your
publications. Malthus - - as may be learnt from his writings - - proceeded
insofar more scientifically than many of his successors, as he included the
possibilities of employment into the means of subsistence, although he gave no
clear indication of what these possibilities consist. If Malthus would have
better worked out this conception, that a country's means of subsistence are
not identical with the quantity of food produced on its own soil, then he would
have attained Prof. Cannan's result. But Malthus did not elevate his
investigations to the standpoint which Bastiat took, in his essay: "Things
seen and unseen". Malthus had seen the many unemployed at workhouses and
elsewhere and got the same impression which until today many unemployed
themselves get, while they wait crowded before the Labour-Exchanges: "We
are too many. Food for so many people is unavailable. Therefore we are
hungry."
But what Malthus
did not see, and what you saw, is: Food must be bought
before it is eaten and not men buy but their means of payment
buy.
By this statement you transferred the whole problem to a
sphere very different from the sphere in which Malthusians of the pre-Cannan
period are at home. The introduction of the monetary view of population
questions shifts basis and conclusions.
Now no economist of rank can acknowledge a real
overpopulation before the people stand in queues before the bakeries, although
the monetary system is as good as it can be in the country, as well as in the
food-supplying countries, free trade has removed all obstacles of importation,
technology has opened sufficient communications to the centres of food supply
and no price laws frighten away the food ready to be imported.
In this connection, it must be remarked that a good money
system, so as you demand it in every number of "The Individualist",
includes absence of foreign exchange controls. Here you differ much to your
advantage from Malthus, who never thought that such a control can have anything
to do with food supplies. He also did not become aware that the fear of
merchants, that their payments may be devaluated, plays a very decisive role in
the food supply. But you emphasised this fact.
Let me add that a perfect monetary system includes the
permission to pay imports by means of payment originating at home, so that
conditions like a Dollar scarcity cannot arise.
Under a monetary
system like yours (B. as a personal appeal, ascribed his own system to Milhaud
and to Meulen! - J.Z., 11.2.03.), a country will always seem to be
under-populated, all the foregoing conditions being fulfilled, as long as
queues before the bakeries are not to be seen.
Let me here refer to your book, page 215. You say:
"… at present
the difficulty is for labour to obtain credit or purchasing power; under a more
perfect banking
system it will be
difficult for purchasing power to find labour."
That is perfectly true. But a country, where the demand for
labour constantly surpasses the offer of labour, will never be considered as
overpopulated, also if the prices for food can freely rise as a consequence of
the eater's demand.
Mr. D. would
perhaps answer: But now the world's food supply is really
insufficient, and would refer to authorities like Lord John Boyd Orr and
others.
My answer would be that if in a country all conditions for
sufficient food supply would be fulfilled and then the present monopolistic
money system would be introduced, then and within a few years, the present
state of affairs would arise. A great part of the produced food could no longer
be sold; the people would become undernourished,
the food producers would reduce the land area under food
production and then, certainly, there would come some statistician, proving
that the presently produced quantity of food is insufficient to relieve the
under-feeding of a great part of the population.
In this connection,
let me remind you that the erosion danger, which Lord John Boyd Orr describes
so impressively, has nothing to do with a scarcity of food caused by a too
large increase in the numbers of mankind.
Moreover, judging by statistics published every year in The
Statesman's Yearbook, for the last 86 years, it seems that, in general, the
arable land of the world increases constantly and also the yield per acre.
(So much about the "threat by erosion". - J.Z.,
11.2.03.)
It may also be assumed that Lord John's numbers do not apply
to remote times but for our own time only. If this were not so, then the food
producing land would have quite disappeared, already for many decades.
That should not prevent the presently living generation to
do more than it did so far, to stop erosion, and if an international action
arises, going in this direction, induced by Lord John's apprehensions, then he
must be counted among mankind's benefactors.
But there is
evidence that an overproduction of food would, in our time, be the real
problem, from the moment that a money system like yours would make every eater
a buyer, so that the present restrictions on production would fall.
Overproduction of agrarian products has been the problem of
the whole 19th and 20th century. That may very simply be
seen from any annual set of any agrarian journal of food exporting countries,
USA or Germany, South America or Africa.
That also in the present year the danger of overproduction
is given, is fully proven by President Truman's order to reduce the USA wheat
producing area in the year 1950 by 17%.
(J.Z.: Local over-production, combined with local
under-consumption in many other areas, whose people are not enabled or allowed
to buy the surplus of food producing countries by means of alternative exchange
media, clearing options and value standards that would satisfy both sides. -
J.Z., 11.2.03.)
Not enough eaters, say the USA farmers, although they
should express themselves more exactly and say:
Not enough buyers.
Immediately before
the war, the situation was about the same. In his admirable "History of
the Homeland", London, 1946, Henry Hamilton publishes at page 193 the
heading of a newspaper article that appeared on September 16th, 1938:
"Surplus Wheat, 365 Million Bushels,"
"Unwanted", "Embarrassing Crops". It is one of hundreds of similar news to be
found in the papers of that time, only eleven years behind us.
The British
Information Centre, to which Berlin Readers are indebted for the supply of so
much valuable literature, deserves all praise for the good selection in its
library, open to every inhabitant of Berlin. (Not only to those of the British
Zone.) Without the help of the BIC, as interesting books as those of Hamilton and
Trevelyan, written in a really philosophical spirit and with surprising
erudition, would here remain unknown.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: Bth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 5.
XI. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
In your letter of 20. X. 49. you say:
"But the
whole objection to tourists, taking currency abroad, is that we do not get
goods in return for their purchases."
I assert: You do
get them. Or, expressed more exactly: You got them. What happens is
merely that the succession: "Export - Import" is reversed and has
become: "Import - Export". The difference is without significance
concerning the aim, which is here to be attained. It is quite
indifferent whether an Englishman Is
it art Englishman drinks a bottle of French wine at Dover
and pays it with a pound note or he drinks it at Calais and pays it with a
pound note. Economically both amounts to the consuming of goods from abroad. If
the goods come to the man (import) or if the man comes to the goods (travelling
of the consumer) is a difference merely from the standpoint of language, or
also from the standpoint of the customs house, which loses the wine customs.
But the latter set aside, economically there is not the least difference.
You say in your
letter: "The tourists buy what they please abroad, but we do not get the
food and raw material that we want." (Was M. really a Free Trader and in
favour of freedom of movement and exchange arrangements? Why did he have to be
taught still such basic economic lessons? - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
I. If my traveller
is absent from England, then he cannot eat there, and the government is
free from the care of providing the gentleman with food. And if he prefers
drinking wine to eating??? Perhaps he is a pious man, who says: In the first
place I care for my soul, and this time my soul exactly wanted wine.
You should leave him that liberty. Agnostics, too, are not exempt from the duty
to be tolerant towards religions.
II.) Perhaps he
buys one of the nice French portfolios, as I did when I was in Switzerland in
the year 1926. (I have not seen that country since. But I still possess that
portfolio. I had it in my pocket, when I left my burning house in 1943.) In
this case the government is free from the care to provide material for
portfolios. (wallets. - J.Z.)
And the workers, who wait for the making of portfolios in London??? The
question is justified, but if the English
notes return from abroad, they will, inter alia, also buy English
portfolios, not less in quality than the French.
If we will get
d'accord about the question of paying purchases of goods abroad by English
travellers with English notes, we will get d'accord on very many other
questions logically closely connected with this question.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
In his
"Geschichte des Abfalls der Vereinigten Niederlande" (History of the
Secession of the United Netherlands), Schiller - - as historian no less
eminent than as Poet - - describes the effect of the price maximum law, enacted
in the the year 1586 by the Senate of Antwerp, on the events of this year and
the following. He describes especially the fall of Antwerp in the next year,
inter alia to the lack of food produced by this law. A great fleet from
Zealand, loaded with corn, had landed at Antwerp, enduring much danger. But as
the merchants heard about this law and were told that no exception would be
made in their favour, they preferred to sail back with their corn. Antwerp was
taken and with Antwerp the whole of Belgium was lost for the Dutch. Had they
held Antwerp, they would have become the by far most powerful nation of their
time, very probably, they would have taken South America from Spain and the
world's history would have taken a quite different course.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- - - - - - - - - -
In my letter to you
of yesterday, I mentioned the books of Hamilton and Trevelyan. I owe my
acquaintance with these books directly
to you. When I went to the British Information Centre some days ago, to
inform myself about Essex Salt Marsh, I looked in the shelves reserved for
economics books and discovered the two named. Also I discovered the article of
Carr-Saunders in the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. If the editors of the "Malthusian" would have
known this article, they would have remarked to my letter, printed in the October-issue:
"All what the old boy here says has been said at least as well by Cannan
and by Carr-Saunders; and they would have been quite right.
The Malthusian movement is now, after the writings of
Cannan and Carr-Saunders, logically dead and is
now restrained to the spheres where logic, science and facts
are of no importance. As Drysdale quite
rightly remarked, Malthusianism is a religion, and who did ever refute a
religion?
The real
religious foundation of Malthusianism is - - as long before me was observed - -
the old religious mentality, that sexual intercourse is in itself a sin
and the miseries in the world are the consequence of this sin.
Schopenhauer
explains, that this view - - like so many other errors - - is not quite
destitute of reason. Schopenhauer says: It sexual intercourse were accompanied
by this high degree of love which some poets describe, but which very few men
experience, then the offspring would be of such a quality, that he creates his
own suitable conditions of life in the
middle of the life of average men, just like man does in the middle of insects
and other relatively strong and intelligent beasts, but inferior to men.
Turgenev, in his novel "The New Generation" starts
from this idea of Schopenhauer.
Here would be given a standpoint for women to tackle
the social question. Then, I think, matters of love are not outside
their sphere, although the questions of connecting note-issuing with the
standard of living may well be.
Turgenev's novel, although now forgotten - - is still worth
reading.
The old sectarians,
with their pessimistic view of love in general, dully felt what
Schopenhauer says in clear words. The average man, with his interests
restrained to the animal part of his life, is the natural product - - says Schopenhauer
- - of sexual intercourse without as much love that a poet could be interested
in it. (Such people would also care much more about their children and thus
provide them with a better upbringing, not only physically but also mentally. -
J.Z., 11.2.03.)
Wolzogen, an
author much read 30 years ago, said: The really great real love exists in the
world but no more frequently than do great diamonds and left-turned snails
exist. Devote - - reader - - your life to the research of that great love in
your own life, that you may get a chance. It you do not, even the chance
is lost for you. That - - Wolzogen said - - is my ethics.
(Alas, it seems that B. never found the partner that would
have been quite right for him. But if he had, then his output of ideas, books,
papers and letters would have, probably, been much smaller. For a while, for
the last few years, he considered myself and my former wife as his adopted
children, but also, e.g., Eckard Duewal and perhaps some others. - J.Z.,
11.2.03.)
It was my intention
to correspond about these questions with Louise Saxe Eby, one of the most
extraordinary women of our time. And now she is dead!
"Das ist das Los,
das Menschenlos, (That is the
lot of men,
"Was schoen und gut
und gross Whatever is
beautiful, good and great
"Auf Erden nimmt
ein schlechtes Ende.: On Earth,
comes to a bad end. - J.Z.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- - - - - - - - - -
There are two kinds
of economists:
I.) Men like Adam Smith, David Hume, Steuart, Roscher,
Quesnay, who arise from great communities (Adam
Smith from the world's economy) and from this high point of view explain
the individual's economy. Factors like public opinion, general stand of
morality, political freedom, religious tolerance and the people's rights enter
into their kind of investigation as well, as factors of individual economy. On
the other side, they demonstrate that the individual's economy necessarily influences
the great politics, general morality, political freedom.
II.) Writers like Malthus and many others, who start from
the individual's sphere (Aristotle, too). In their sphere things like freedom,
morality, culture, religion, etc. are of subordinate significance. For this
reason such writers do not appreciate these factors for political economy and
if they occupy themselves with it, then they write books on the subject of
special spheres of investigation. Seldom do such writers emancipate their minds
from the mentality of their times and seldom do they open new aspects to their
contemporaries. In general they merely justify some current prejudices. To them
it is self-evident, that great families are a burden to the large
family's father, and
they are unable to show how additional means of subsistence
may be won - - for this requires a mentality such as Adam Smith possessed. - -
They only know one means: Keeping the family small. I think that even a
philosopher like Benjamin Franklin belonged to the latter kind of authors.
These authors
seldom appreciate the military side of the population question. The
others do, and in our times a man like Smith would say: It is not sufficient to
estimate the optimum of population. It is necessary to estimate the technically
possible maximum of population. Of course, while population is
increasing from the optimum point to the maximum point, the returns per capita
decrease. But the difference must be considered as expenses for securing our
existence, as long as States like Russia, China or India exist, whose rulers
are every day able to direct about 1/20th of the population as a
conquering army against their neighbours.
Of England he would
have said: She should have as many inhabitants as she can technically
have. The technical impossibility of a further increase begins when, in times
of peace and of normal crops, and in spite of free trade, free banking and
normal communications, the people begin to stand in queues before the bakeries.
Not before.
If it would be politically
and mentally possible to reconstruct the old Hohenstauffen empire (to
which belonged Toulon and Marsaille) and
unite it with England, that empire could nourish without any difficulty 500
million inhabitants and would thus be secure against the United
Russia-China-India millions with their 1,500 million people.
If Heaven has not
irrevocably resolved to deliver the world to the Soviets (At the moment it
seems he has) then
in the West will arise men, who are at least interested in
such questions and do not at once fall asleep if they hear of them. (As Germans
do, which I know from my own experience.) That is, what distinguishes the
Soviets from all others: They are always interested in questions that concern
themselves and in finding out, what questions do lie within their
sphere. And such men are human tigers and their intelligence is that of beasts
of prey!
Until now man was nothing but a blunder of nature!
-----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
11.11.49.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
Collective Responsibility.
Some days ago, my
district of the Social Democratic Party had its monthly meeting. The comrade,
who should have delivered a lecture, had not appeared. Then the chairman said to an old man: Hello,
old boy! You are president of one of the denazification-commissions, tell us
something about your experiences.
The president, without hesitation, delivered a good speech
of about one hour. He underlined the absolute impartiality of his commission.
He told us: There are Nazis and Nazis. If I know that the manager of a factory
or the president of an office reported all employees as members of the party,
without even asking them, then the thus reported party member is for us not a
Nazi without any without further checks. We know, that a protest of the so
notified would have meant, in most cases, dismissal, often the concentration
camp. If there are no witnesses that he noted as acted as a Nazi, we denazify
him.
A great trouble for us are the regulations of the Military
governments. Some weeks ago we had new regulations by which such Nazis are to
be punished severely, who, on the strength of former regulations, must be
denazified. The new regulations - - he said - - are probably edited with the
help of emigrants. A socialist, who always lived in the country and knew these
matters by his own experience would never have framed such regulations. I - -
he continued - - think that a part of the new regulations are in contradiction
to the principles of Nürnberg. These principles say that inhuman or
unreasonable regulations must not be obeyed and that, on the contrary, it is
the duty of every man to resist if possible. I certainly will not obey.
May they dismiss me or put me to a prison.
The effect was very
different of what he expected. Some old men as I applauded; the youth attacked
him violently:
"Why are we
where we are now? By the Nazis! Who began the war? The Nazis! Who would have
sacrificed us without hesitation for a little advantage of Nazism? The Nazis!
Everyone, who ever belonged to the party must be punished an severely as
possible." Etc.
And now one of the
eldest member spoke and said: You all know that I was in a Nazi-Concentration
Camp for four years. There I was treated in a way that it is not the merit of
the guards that I am still alive. I do think it would be just to consider as
murderers all those, who participated in the daily ill-treatments. But to
punish a man simply because he was a member of the party would be an
application of the collective responsibility principle, which I decline and we,
altogether, have formerly always declined.
The end was, that
he, the first who spoke, and some other old men - - all with grey hair or white
- - had a vast majority against them.
(I belonged to that minority.) And when a member of the shop council of the
great Berlin Traffic Company (tramways, subways, busses) declared, that the
shop council applied the principle of collective responsibility insofar as
wives of Nazis were not accepted as workers - - with few exceptions - - he got a great applause by the youths.
I would not have
reported this little scene if I would not think it to be a typical one.
I beg to say some
words to your remarks about collective responsibility in your letter of 9. X. 1949:
I think, that Tucker would have accepted Machiavelli's
principle:
Not he, who as the
first begins a war, is the real beginner, but he, who compels, by his
behaviour, the attack upon him.
("De arte militaria.")
That is also your standpoint and also mine. If the
Associations for Mutual Protection, proposed by Tucker, were already
established, then they must, if they want to continue to exist and do take
themselves serious, accept the Machiavelli principle and must openly proclaim
it in their program. Kant disapproved of preventative wars.
(Präventivkriege) Here I cannot follow him.
Example: If the American Militia would be organised as an
association on the foundation of Tucker's principles, then they would have
destroyed in the middle of a - - seeming
- - peace, the Russian Atomic Bomb Factories, provided the technical
possibility had existed. By this very destruction peace would have been preserved.
- The American army remained passive, although the leaders knew what would
happen to the world's destiny if the Kremlin would have atomic bombs at its
disposal.
(J.Z.: Atomic bombs in the hands of USA governments are
morally hardly better, although less likely to be used - again. Twice they were
already used by an USA government and the USA government was neither mentally
nor otherwise ever prepared for a unilateral nuclear disarmament and one with
regard to biological and chemical mass murder devices. To that extent it has
also been totalitarian and subscribed to the principle of collective
responsibility against all the victims of the Kremlin behind the Iron Curtain
and the Bamboo Curtain and provoked the construction of the same kind of
terrorist "weapons" in these other countries and some others. - J.Z.,
11.2.03.)
You speak of
canvassing votes against State-capitalism. That's not your concern. Your
concern is to frame arguments against State capitalism and frame them so
that an average voter understands them. Until now nobody has sufficiently
refuted all the arguments by which the masses are seduced.
----------------
"Well - -
there are many things wrong in Russia and at the British governing party. But
the Bolsheviks in Russia and that party in England prevent us from
unemployment. Their methods do not seem the best, but nobody has made known
other, comprehensible and trustworthy methods."
(I am not sure here whether B. does here quote M's actual
words or just states an all too popular opinion in B.'s own words and English.
Since this segment is in quotation marks, I have not changed it. I may not get
around to publish Meulen's letters to B for a long time, if ever. - J.Z.,
11.2.03.)
Votes are
not the right measure for responsibility. Many people vote against a party
merely to protest against this party's principles or methods. Or they vote for
a party because they believe the party to be the least of possible evils.
There is much to be said against the present voting system,
and Tucker and his adherents contributed thoughts for a reconstruction of the
administration of public affairs. Inter alia a system of an effective
right of recall (you know the system) must be introduced. If a people does
not use this right, although it had the possibility to use it, one may speak of
collective responsibility.
(J.Z.: Only if one subscribes to the majority principle or
one has reorganised territorial States into exterritorial communities of
voluntary members only. B. failed here to define "the people" and
thus leaves the matter to the predominant territorialist and
"representative" ideas and institutions. - J.Z., 11.2.03. Even if a
recall attempt does not find majority approval, the minority that favours the
recall should have the right to secede and to establish an exterritorially
autonomous volunteer community. - J.Z., 2.6.03.)
But there you are
right. Those who voted for Hitler deserve very much blame
(J.Z.: B. also blamed the individualist anarchist Dr.
Walther Borgius [Two of his titles can be found in PEACE PLANS 331 & 338.],
whom he knew personally, for having voted for Hitler with the motivation: Once
in power, this guy will make himself so ridiculous, that he will be toppled and
anarchism will gain from his example. B. had objected, that as an experienced
anarchist, with much knowledge of history, he should have been aware that once
a regime is in power then, in spite of making committing many crimes and making
numerous mistakes at the expense of its subjects, it cannot be very easily
overthrown. An armed man in the saddle is not easily unhorsed by unarmed and
untrained men. - But this is just one example of how diverse even the votes for
Hitler were. - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
But the following circumstances are to be considered:
I.) A great part of the votes was simply falsified. Nobody
can say to what a degree. I personally think: There is a probability greater
than 90 %, that if the votes had not been falsified, then there would not have
been a majority for Hitler. I won my impressions by talking with members of
election committees of Berlin. (It seems that the participants in these frauds
were dishonest enough never to speak or right about them. - J.Z., 2.6.03.)
(J.Z.: Since WW II we have had several and published
examples of famous USA presidents having gained election victories by forgeries
of votes, wherever a few changed votes mattered greatly. If that can happen
even there, without large and openly totalitarian parties, and in spite of
influential and relatively free mass media, then we should not be surprised,
that such things happened under crisis conditions, towards the end of the
Weimar Republic in Germany and that the Nazis came thus to power, with Hitler
being appointed as chancellor by President Hindenburg, as, seemingly, the
leader of the largest party and the largest block of voters, all others being
split a hundred-fold. Almost no one doubts now, that most elections under
communist regimes, the other large-scale totalitarians, are hardly more than a
farce. Even afterwards, the Nazis had still no clear-cut majority in the
Reichstag, the German parliament, and so they arranged for the burning of it
and also for a scape-goat for their own arsonist action: a mentally defective
and supposed communist, which gave them a seeming "justification", to
throw all Communist MPs out of parliament, which finally gave them a majority
in this talk-shop. Arranged events, like the "unprovoked" and
"unknown" attack upon Pearl Harbour, by "democratic"
regimes are nothing very new any more to voters and readers in the
"free" West. Some even compared that event with the September 11th
2001 terrorist attacks against people in the USA, as if the US government had
conspired with these terrorists to make them "successful". A huge
gain in popularity and power for the US government was one other great negative
result of this event. Thus the US government certainly had a motive and the
opportunity. All territorial governments are capable of almost any crime. They
prepared for a nuclear Armageddon! - President Bush II, however, is quite right
in wanting to see to it that Saddam Hussein does not posses ABC mass murder
devices or acquires them. However, Western governments supplied him in the past
with some biological and chemical weapons or facilities for producing them! But
a "conventional" or "modern and scientific" war against the
whole small country, his subjects, his victims, or against his capital, is
certainly not a rightful and optimal way to achieve that. The USA government
has not even been successful in finding, capturing or executing Bin Laden! So
far S. H. has not been personally targeted, nor have the at least 5
ethnical/religious communities and numerous other dissenting groups there been
offered full exterritorial autonomy, by e.g. fully recognising their
governments-in-exile and allying the USA governments with them. As for the oil
in Iraq: The US government should clearly state that it wants shares in these
assets, to the extent that they are in the hands of the Iraq government, to be
freely and equally distributed among all the inhabitants of Iraq. Then the USA
government could hardly be any longer accused of merely pursuing "oil
interests". All people in Iraq would then and for the first time get their
own oil interests. - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
II.) When the voters saw - - still in 1933 - - what
jackasses they had been, they had no opportunity to change anything.
III.) England, France and all others remained not only
passive but began to deliberate with Hitler and to treat him on an equal
footing. In January 1933 Belgium or Austria alone would have been able to
restore liberty in Germany. It was the duty of the other governments towards
their own people to let their armies march in January 1933. In less than four
weeks, and with the loss of a few thousand men, they could have occupied the
country, assisted by millions of Non-Nazis.
IV.) The leaders of the German army were allied with Hitler.
The general impression in Germany is even that their program had been:
a.) We get the political power with the help of
Hitler; we make him the successor of Hindenburg, but we will
remain the
true masters, as we have the army in our hands.
b.) If our main
program - - restoring an army of several hundred-thousand men - - is fulfilled,
we will demand
the repeal
of the Treaty of Versailles (at which they gazed with hypnotised attention and
which they believed
- - so their professors
had taught them - - to be the main cause of unemployment and all other evils),
then we
dismiss Hitler and
choose one of us. (They did not yet know whom.)
In every case, resistance against the army was technically
impossible.
One might have
said: By their votes the Germans have proven that they are not able to govern
Germany. G. must for some time be governed by the League of Nations. That would
not have been a bad program. Also the dividing of such a powerful and dangerous
State as Germany into the States formerly constituting the "Deutscher
Bund" (before 1866) might have been possible. Rousseau said: "A State
should not dispose over more than 4 million inhabitants. His reasons are not
bad. (His principles do not only apply to Germany.)
----------------
Social Statics.
(Your letter of 9. X. 49.) (Herbert Spencer, Secession & Desertion. - J.Z.)
I assert: If in 1919 or perhaps even in 1938 the English and
the French government would have declared: If at a future war any soldier of
the army with which we are at war, leaves that army and declares that he was
not a volunteer but was compelled to fight, then he will not be considered as a
prisoner of war, but as the subject of a neutral State - - then, a few months
later, Hitler would not have had enough men to form a life guard. But I wrote
to you about this subject more fully in several letters. Feel certain that one
day Russia (rather, its communist regime, as the Chinese communist
regime did in China - J.Z., 11.2.03) will successfully apply the principle.
-----------------
I do admit: If
anyone talks to an average German (minister, member of parliament, editor of an
average paper, worker, manager of a
factory, etc.) he at once yawns like a crocodile and asks: What is the price of
tobacco now? or: What will I get to eat this evening???
The faculty of political thinking has surprisingly
diminished for some decades.
Pending the first world war, I had opportunities to talk
about the principle (it is a principle) to German officers. They all answered,
that such thoughts were the privilege of the marshals and the emperor, not of
officers and
still much less of simple soldiers. Much more interest I
found among my comrades. Some were fully convinced and said: That's a new kind
of pacifism! After the war we will start a movement! We must remain in touch! I
lost sight of all of them. I tried also to convince some English prisoners. All
of them told me: Such thoughts are useless. Germany will be defeated and then a
new order of things will be established, so that measures, as you propose them,
are no longer necessary.
When I talked about it to the son of Follin (you know
Follin, I hope) he answered: The French are - - in these things - -
narrow-minded. If German soldiers, coming over voluntarily, to our side, would
not be treated as prisoners are usually treated, they will protest, all
journals will protest and nobody, who tries to explain the true nature of the
new principle, will be heard or he will become suspect as a spy of the Germans.
Perhaps he was right in this.
(J.Z.: My cousin, Wolfgang Seher, deceased, conscripted as a
young man into the Nazi's forces, never came to hate those he was forced to
fight. But after the treatment he received in France, for a few years, as POW
and being abused there as a forced labourer, he came to dislike, for a while,
everything French! In this he neglected that one of his grandfathers was also
of French Huguenot descent and still had a French name: Canon. - J.Z.,
11.2.03.)
May be by now all such considerations are too late, The
Kremlin possesses atomic bombs! But there may be still one expedient: Offer to all
those, who handle the bombs, a sufficient amount of good gold coins, if they
deliver the bombs to a secure place. The probability is by no means zero that
they will do it. But this possibility is connected with the principle
considered above.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
12. 11. 1949. Your letter of 7.
11. 49., received today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
with great pleasure I expect the printed matters announced.
I am surprised that
Communist Anarchism is not yet dead but still alive in England.
(When in 1958 I tried to organise, stimulated into it by
Ulrich von Beckerath, a discussion centre and an open air speaking centre in
Berlin, a few of the old communist anarchists turned also up at my meetings and
I remember that they were the only ones who at first volunteered some small
monetary contributions, counted in a few "Groschen" only, saying that
they knew how much such meetings would cost. Obviously, they could not afford
more but what they could afford they gave. That touched me. So at least some of
the German communist anarchists survived as well. Later some more "came
out of the woodwork". Then and now
it was the individualist anarchists and anarcho-capitalists that were really
scarce in Germany. They old communist anarchists were nice human beings - but
so backwards in economics! At the same time, on some points, quite the
realists, not just talkers, writers and listeners. - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
One must always remember the great and practically unlimited
liberty of thought and freedom of speech in England. Kant says, that institutions,
such as a good constitution, may fail, and do really fail in the long
run, but - - says Kant - - "liberty
of the pen" is better than all institutions and - - in the long run - -
produces all necessary reforms. (Kant says not, that good institutions were of
no use, on the contrary. But institutions do grow obsolete and may then produce
the contrary of what their the founders intended.
(In these days I read about the secret trials in old
law, later misused in the trials of heretics and witches. But in the beginning
the institution was not so bad. Experience had taught that people of inferior
rank or poor had not the courage to openly accuse mighty persons or to bear
witness against them. But if they got the chance to talk in the absence of the
mighty, then they spoke openly.)
You write: "
... the Duke of Bedford contributes monthly notes on Douglas". Is
that the Social Credit Douglas? His system is impossible without Cours forcé
and a money authority, blindly and without hesitation obeyed by the people. It
is the very contrary of anarchism. The duke's character induces respect, his
intelligence less so. How is it possible that the editor of "The
Word" accepts articles about the Social Credit System?? (The names
invented by these modern economic sectarians are, in most cases, very good,
although as misleading as possible.)
The History of
socialism proves that original, good and really socialistic ideas (the word
"socialistic" used in the sense in which Benjamin R. T u c k e r used
it) seldom originate in the brain of people, who would get the greatest
advantage from the realisation of these ideas. Many more than 90 % of the great
socialistic thinkers were no proletarians, not Marx, not Lassalle, not Engels,
not Lenin, not Trotsky, not Stalin, not Proudhon.
Also the history of
the Anti-Slavery movement does not contain not a single name of a slave as a
champion against slavery, with the sole exception of Toussaint-l'Ouverture. He
confirmed the old rule of slave-masters: Let never a slave learn reading and
writing! Toussaint was taught it, so that his master had a librarian. He read
all books in the library and Plutarch more than others. T. became not only an
insurgent but a conscious adversary of slavery. But it is well known that he
descended from an old African royal (or at least chieftain) family. It is said,
that the Negroes of Haiti knew that and for this reason obeyed him willingly.
At the time of
Tolstoy and certainly by the influence of his writings, it became frequent in Russia
that aristocrats ceded their estates to the peasants. Tolstoy himself describes
such a case in his novel "Resurrection". At last the government
enacted a law by which the cession of estates in other ways than by sale in the
usual forms and at usual terms was prohibited.
I am firmly
convinced that the most exasperated enemies of State socialism are at the court
of Stalin and sometimes I suspect that Stalin himself (who is certainly no
blockhead) is a socialist in the sense of Tucker. (Did not Nikolaus I., that
bloody despot, admire and assist Robert Owen?)
----------------
You will - - I hope - -
be so kind as to send me your article published in the "Word".
Do you know the
very detailed and excellent explanation of Individualist and Communistic
Anarchism in John Henry Mackay's "Die Anarchisten", a very
good novel?
About twenty years ago, I took the courage to visit John
Henry Mackay. He had become a hermit and was - - economically - - in a bad
situation. He was compelled to sell his library - - unique in the world - -
containing nearly all anarchist and most socialist writings. He found no buyer,
but at last he get a very good offer from the Marx-Engels-Institute at Moscow.
Now the books are at the place where they can produce more good than at any
other.
(J.Z.: I believe that he wrote that with future communist
censors in mind. In communist libraries even some writings by Goethe were under
censorship! But at least Mackay's library was preserved there and he had the
benefit of the sales proceeds. After the fall of the Soviet regime, did a rush
of anarchist and libertarians and libertarian socialists result to that
library, to photocopy any rare freedom text that would otherwise be
inaccessible and to reproduce them first on microfiche, then on floppy disks,
on CD-ROMs and online? I have not yet heard of such an attempt. Have you? The
anarchistic "chaoists" do not tend to move in that direction. Nor do
the individualist anarchists, alas, or the general libertarians. As if a few
new anarchist and libertarian titles, temporarily in print and at the usual
high book prices, would be enough to promote this kind of enlightenment! - I
would gladly help to sponsor a visit to that library with A $ 500 - provided I
get good photocopies of at least 10 significant titles that are not yet in my
library or in my LMP collection and are wanted by me. Whoever undertakes that chore
would best take his own and excellent as well as portable photocopy machine
along and sufficient supplies like toner. At the end he might profitably sell
that machine there, at least on the black market. - The "activists"
rather march, sign petitions, wave flags etc., etc. - J.Z., 11.2.03.)
When I was young, I
had often an opportunity to talk to Communist Anarchists. Their theory was: If
capitalism is removed, human nature will work in a similar way as nature works
among the bees and beavers. They reminded me also of the Eskimos, who live
without a government and even without chieftains, and are known as the morally
best people in the world. I asked them: Do you believe that also men like the
Tsar Nikolaus II and the Grand Duke Konstantin - - at the time the most hated men in
revolutionary circles - - will change their present nature? They reflected and
then answered: They - - no - - they certainly not!
Now I had the Communists! I told them: You admit, that we
must protect ourselves against people like them! and if it should be that such
people are more numerous than expected, we must create powerful organisations
against them. That's all what Individualist Anarchism demands.
Firstly, they insisted, that people like Konstantin were
rare exceptions, so that it would not be worthwhile to create organisations
against them.
Then I asked one of them, who had just had his 2 years of
army service behind him and had told evil things, about the treatment of
socialist soldiers by sergeants and officers and even comrades: Do you think
that the sergeants, officers and comrades, who treated you so badly, will
change their nature rapidly? That seemed doubtful to him, and at the end of the
discussion their conviction on mans true nature was somewhat changed.
The people always
think in general terms and expressions. H. L. Follin, whom I
believe to be (have been. I believe that he died just before WW II. - J.Z.,
11.2.03.) one of France's best heads, says:
The habit of thinking in general terms is one of the
greatest obstacles to social reform. Authors, who write in general terms
and so, indirectly, confirm the people's bad mentality, are not better than
criminals and the true counter-revolutionaries.
---------------------
Christ.
I think our opinions are not different in essentials.
We are both convinced, that most of what the Churches believe to be the really
important in the 4 Evangiles never occurred or is so miss-stated, that it may
be a task for historians and philologues, but not a fit basis for a religion. I
admit also, that in books, which report so many miracles as the Evangiles,
every detail is suspect. But details as the attempt of Christ's family to
arrest him as a madman, his quarrels with his family on other occasions, his
parables and many astonishing words are very probably not invented and
even not misrepresented. If I find a parable like that in Luke 19, 12 ff and
find, in the work of Josephus, that he reports the same story but
mentions the king Archelaus as the nobleman, then I conclude: Christ was well
informed about the history of his country, spoke also about this history to his
disciples, but - - as it common practice in oriental countries - - in a very
cautious manner when kings were concerned, whose family still governed. Luke,
an excellent novelist, obviously took the story as it was reported to him, but
did not understand the real sense, just like some listeners of Christ did not
understand it and, a fortiori, the churches did not understand it.
Christ would represent the character of Archelaus - -
disharmonic but not 100 % bad - - by a remarkable story, which really explains
that character and by which really something may be learnt, if it is not taken
as religious contribution but as one to practical philosophy. Luke, no Jew, was
not well informed about Jewish history and, therefore, could not detect
Archelaus behind the "nobleman".
The most
interesting fact is that such books as the Evangiles could become the
foundation of a great and widespread religion. It is no less astonishing than
the fact (I take it from Gibbon) that the Koran was written on paper, 30 years after
Mohammed's death, before only on shoulder-blades of sheep, by Mohammed's
secretary and laid, disregarded, in a box. Mohammed was so misunderstood by the
secretary that M. firmly declined the authorship of these writings and
expressed the wish that any of his friends might kill the secretary. And,
nevertheless, once re-discovered and written, from that source, the Koran
became the foundation of several religions. (Amusingly represented in Volney's
"Les ruines".)
(C. F. Volney, 1792, in the German and English translation,
were reproduced by me in PEACE PLANS No. 559. - J.Z.)
A philosopher,
whose name I forgot (perhaps Gibbon) remarked, that some religions seem
to be founded on books, but really are not and cannot be, because in old times
the greatest part of the people could not read and therefore did not know what
the books contained. The religions were propagated by ceremonies and often
repeated details from the Holy Books,
such as the Christmas Story and the trial of Christ before Pilatus. (I think
that trial took place and most details are true.)
-----------------
Co-operation
versus State-Socialism.
The employees of the Coop Wholesale Soc. do not form a
cooperative in itself and so their work is to be considered as a mere
employee-work, which has nothing to do with co-operative work. The whole
Wholesale Soc.
is not organised as a co-operative, and probably cannot be organised in
this way. Here is the principle's limit.
"Est modus in rebus, sunt certi danique fines",
which I picked up in an Encyclopaedia with a translation. (You know that I do
not understand Latin, one of the reasons for my being a fanatic of Latin and
Greek as a basis of education. I do know what I lack.)
If old State-Socialists
honestly believed, that under State-Socialism workers would give of their best
"because they would know that they are working for themselves", they
fell into the old error that the State is a great co-operative. Individualistic
Anarchism and now the facts in Russia and the Satellite-States have refuted the
old error in a very impressive manner.
-------------
Liberty.
Certainly, I would like to read some old issues. If you will
take the trouble to lend them to me, I will e very much obliged to you.
Gibson
What you say of him is quite right. But he may know: If he
does not put Free Banking among his aims, then his movement will be a
separatist movement of which history will not take any notice and which will
remain without success. By including Free Banking, the old Scotch Tradition,
into the program, he will march "à la tête de la civilisation".
(That's no yoke.) Gibson's character reminds me of Fouriers's noble
character. If the fact you report were generally known, this would add some
people of importance to the number of his adherents. Others, of no worse
character, would have considered the thing from another standpoint, so as you
(and I agree), but the main thing is: Doing what oneself believes in, may
others think what they like.
Rittershausen just
published an article in the "Morgen" of Mannheim. He says, that in
the whole world not a single man considered the devaluation as a matter of right
or wrong, and that this was the worst of all. Rittershausen did
not know, that besides himself, Gibson is the second.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U.v.Beckerath, ….
18.11.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
yesterday I received:
1.) "Pagan Christs" by Robertson,
2.) "analysis" of October 1949,
3.) "City Press" of 28. X. 1949,
4.) "Truth" of 4.11. and 28.10.49.
5.) "The Scots Independent,' of November 1949,
6.) "The Economic Digest of "November 1949,
7.) last, but most important of the 7: "The Word"
of November 1949.
Many thanks for the trouble you took, time and postage you
spent and the printed matters, all of great interest, just as you promised.
At first I read - -
of course - - the "Word". I expect. that several readers - - perhaps
even many - - will write to you. Your letter to the Editor, page 16, is
no less exciting for serious truth-seekers - - and I think most readers of the Word
are - - than your article on pages 20 - 22.
And that's possible
in England - - an editor lets his adversary speak two times in the same
number.
-----------------
I hope: the young communists (it they are all of the kind of
Aldred, they must at last become Individualists) will pose to Individualism the
following question:
"In this
town there are 100,000 unemployed. Is it technically possible, by your
principles, to find work for them in less than a year? And if not, what laws,
regulations or institutions prevent it? What laws or regulations must be
repealed to make this employment (in any legal form) technically
possible?"
Now (to/ - J.Z.)
live in England and answer such a question!!!!
(It appears, that Henry Meulen never did! - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
----------------
Today only this
short acknowledge of receipt.
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
My time is very
occupied. The holes in the roof of our house cause much trouble, and today we
got two breaks of water pipes.
All consequences of damages by bombs.
Bth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
18.
11. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
of the Word I had still today nothing read but your
contributions. Now I read the rest and hope to say still something about it.
Today in haste: At
page 23, Ian More tells us, that Guy A. Aldred wants 300 L. Why does
Aldred not read your book and why does he not apply its principles to
his case? Let him print, on the Strickland Press, 1,000 Tickets with the
following text:
This Ticket
will be accepted as One
Shilling,
from 1. I. 1950 to 31.
XII. 1950
for payments of
subscriptions to The Word,
for books purchased at
its library or
at the entrance of
meetings, organized
by The Word, as
entrance fee.
Then Guy A. Aldred may go to his creditors and tell them:
A rascal gives more then he possesses. (? Pretends to give
more …? - J.Z.)
That's what I possess. I think that a part of your
creditors will accept the tickets, especially workers. Try it and - - if possible - - let me talk to
your creditors.
Guy A. Aldred knows
the history of the English Tradesmen's Tokens and, therefore, knows too, that
such tickets, 150 years ago, would have been a quite normal thing. Also, from
your book, he could know, that note-issuing in England began in many dozens of
cases by the issuing of such tickets. Guy A. Aldred may also consult the
American "Sound Currency" of which I possessed the volumes 1895 and
1896 (burnt), where, in an excellent article of John DeWitt Warner,
tickets of a similar kind are described. ("The Currency Famine of
1893.")
Why not be
independent from State money??? You detected that irredeemable tickets
are permitted in England. . Perhaps your discovery will now save Guy A. Aldred.
1,000 Shillings
would be a beginning. A. wants 6,000 Shillings.
Once the first 1,000 Shillings are spent, he may print
(gradually! - J.Z.) the next 5,000.
In a case of distrust,
the ticket-bearer will come to him and buy copies of the Word, books and
visit his meetings. As long as A. is able to make good the tickets in this way,
on demand, there will be no danger, neither for him nor for the
ticket-bearers.
But long term investments cannot be immediately
financed by such tickets. If A. wants long term loans, then he must use
the option clause.
Say, he wants to buy a new machine for 449.55 L. He will pay
for it by instalments. Then he must give his creditor 60 bills, each for the
amount of 10 L, and due at intervals of one month. On each ticket is written:
This ticket is accepted by the Strickland
Press (Here, at last, he offers a
more general service,
for its face value, after being due. more widely
appreciated, not only by
It is also, upon demand - - after being due
- - communist anarchists! - J.Z.,
12.2.03.)
exchanged for 200 tickets of 1 Shilling
each,
with the above text.
On the Bill No. 1
is said: "The obligations from this bill are not due before (1. I. 1950)
and end (31.12.1950 or at a later date, which he may agree to.).
On the Bill No. 2
is said: "The obligations from this bill are not due before (1.II.1950)
and end (31.I.1951 or at a later date, which he may agree to.).
On the Bill No. 3
is said: "The obligations from this bill are not due before (1.III.1950)
and end (28.II.1951 or at a later date, which he may agree to.).
On the Bill No. 60 is
said: "The obligations from this bill are not due before (1.XII.1954) and
end (30.XI.1955 or at a later date, which he may agree to.).
The exchange of the
bills into Tickets, on the date due, is the link, which connects long term
loans with note issuing. It can be seen, from the example, that here option
clauses are used, which defer the exchange to a time suitable in this special
case.
5 years = 12 times
5 = 60 months instalment credit are usual in credits for printing machines. In
the course of that time, the printer must have earned so much that the machine
is fully paid. It assumes that he earns in every month - - in the chosen
example - - 10 L. If that would not be possible, then he cannot buy the
machine.
------------------
Every ticket must
bear a number and a date and - - I think - - also a personal signature of Guy
A. Aldred.
In every edition of
the Word must be stated the amount of outstanding tickets.
Tickets that come
back to the Strickland Press must be destroyed (or cancelled! - J.Z.) like
cheques and the destruction must be announced in the Word (Nr. and date to be
stated.)
Bills due, whose
exchange into tickets is possible, must be stated in the "Word".
-----------------
Then Guy A. Aldred has done what he could do
to win the trust of his customers.
-----------------
What Proudhon,
in his bank lacked, was the option-clause, this most important Scotch
invention. The theory of that
clause is not yet written. But it requires a theory.
-----------------
If, 50 years later,
the ticket-department of the Strickland Press has not become an institute as
big as the Big Five, it will be Guy A. Aldred's fault. (Yes.)
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
The difference: 600
L nominal value of the bills and the debt amount of 449.55 corresponds to an
interest of 1% monthly (very high) for the creditor. Refer to a table
for compound interest such as Spitzer's Tables, chapter "Annuities".
====================
(J.Z.:"Assuming that Guy A. Aldred is or was a printer and that his
printing shop, Strickland Press, is not fully employed, 8 hours a day, or even
24 hours, if he is the only printer working at it, then he should have offered,
as additional "cover" for his own personal notes, his capacity as a
printer for
a) the rest of 8 hours daily, for which time he is presently
not employed, and
b) his capacity to work every day another 8 hours in
printing jobs, or,
c) if not enough of these are made available to him, in
other jobs, e.g., as a general hand, within a certain distance from his
residence and from the premises of Strickland Press.
That would have increased the "shop-foundation",
"service-foundation" or "debt-foundation" for his
"ticket-money". Additional employees and their, possibly, likewise
increased readiness to work an extra shift daily, if printing work for all of
them could be found, would have given his tickets an additional foundation.
He might also have associated his offer with the similar
offers of other unemployed or under-employed anarchist comrades and with some
monetary freedom experimenters. That would have required the mutual acceptance
of tickets and their clearing among them. Since printing is for most people a
marginal usage of their spare funds, while they always need food, any
participating food store would have had to limit its participation to certain
amounts, otherwise it would end up receiving most of the tickets of the
association, while it could use only a limited number of them. The limited
number it could use, among the participants, would indicate its limits to
accept the tickets of the association. So it might indicate: Every week we will
accept up to xyz pounds in this ticket money, by a sign in its shop.
All kinds of service providers: E.g., printers, barbers,
plumbers, electricians, carpenters, gardeners, lawyers, doctors, engineers,
architects, etc., between them, could issue a locally quite widely acceptable
additional local currency, thereby assuring sales for their services, if they
are provided at competitive prices.
By coincidence, only yesterday I made another note on
"ticket-money", in my seemingly never-ending quest to attempt to
point out the connection between full employment and full monetary freedom - as
shortly and clearly as possible:
A Monetary Solution to the Sales Problem for
Labor, Other Services,
Shops, Exporters, and Producers in General,
Agricultural ones Included
Instead of trying to supply them monopolistically &
centrally with exclusive and forced currency, on a paper value
"standard", which is usually mismanaged and which is, nevertheless,
legally and juridically not discountable or refusable as a means of payment,
let all of these, and their voluntary and local associations
as well, supply their own exchange media and adopt their own value standards
(which they consider to be sound enough).
Further: Let all others be quite free to refuse or to
discount these private, cooperative, competitive, optional exchange media,
clearing certificates, goods warrants, service vouchers, bonds, etc. and the
value standards used in them, as they might refuse to accept or might discount
any other ticket offers to any kind of performances.
Then, and quite
obviously, the issuers would get as many jobs, sales or orders for their
services, as they would have managed to issue their tickets in payment for
their requirements. To that extent they would become independent from the
government's monopoly money - and would have become their own note-issuing
"bankers".
Ticket money,
for all performances. That's the ticket! [To - freedom!] - J.Z., 11 & 12.2.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
19.
XI. 1949. Your letter of 16. cr., received today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
you really may be very gratified that the Times
printed your letter to the Editor of 14. XI.
The opportunity for hints as you gave them in your letter is
very favourable. The devaluation loosened all brain cells. Everybody feels:
There must be something wrong with the devaluation; but people can't detect
what it is. In such a situation, a letter like yours will find much attention.
I think you will get a least a dozen letters from tyour readers, who beg for
information.
--------------
I think it
possible, that a reader will ask: Where is the limit for the granting of long
term loans simply by issuing notes?
W. B. Greene
reported that the State notes of North Carolina circulated at par, although
their amount was about 400,000 Dollars - 500,000 Dollars, while the revenue of
the State was much less than 100,000 Dollars per annum. The tax collectors were
the only ones who had to accept the notes at par. And, nevertheless,
this small opportunity to use the notes at par was sufficient to keep the whole
amount at par for about twenty years.
By European
experiences, Lorenz von Stein estimated (in about the year 1870) that a
government can issue an amount of notes equal to about 1/4 of its annual
income. In the case of North Carolina, that would have been less than 25,000
Dollars. But really 20 times more was kept in circulation, practically at par.
The circulation by which an irredeemable paper currency can be kept at par is
very different.
(J.Z.: How much competition did this currency have from
other exchange media? If none, or very little, or not enough, then this may be
a part-explanation. The people in that State needed exchange media and almost
anything would do, as long as it was not obviously valueless or all too rapidly
depreciating. They were not primarily interested in rare metals but in as many
free exchanges of their goods and services for those of others, as possible. -
Perhaps precisely because they could not, or not easily, get gold or silver
coins for this currency from the issuer, but at most on the free currency
market, they passed these notes on as fast as possible, to all who would accept
them at or close to their par value. - The case is so unique that it is worth
exploring further, for all, who do have access to sufficient source documents.
- Who is prepared to write his doctor dissertation on it? - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
German and other
experiences seem to prove that a private bank's ability to grant long term
loans simply by issuing notes is very restricted. Even if the public trusts the
banker, there may suddenly arise a distrust towards the government, in the
government of other States, which prepare wars and such things. If the notes
are issued with cours forcé, they will not get a discount, not even in the case
of very great distrust. But without cours forcé they will. On the other hand,
the cours forcé is the basis of all social and economic evils.
(I believe that Henry Meulen never conceded that but,
rather, like e.g., most lawyers, considered it to be a relatively insignificant
but necessary juridical arrangement, just like most economic textbooks do. -
J.Z., 12.2.03.)
----------------
If I find here in
Berlin somebody willing and able to "lick into shape" a letter to the
editor of the Times, I will write it. It would be important enough to write
such a letter, there you are quite right. But I live here nearly as a hermit.
Among my acquaintances there is nobody who understands banking English
sufficiently. But I will try it.
(J.Z.: When, just married, we arrived in Australia, armed
only with our school-English, we had the same difficulties in getting ourselves
expressed in colloquial English, especially in writing efforts. We were busy
getting established and bringing up 3 kids. 5 years later the marriage broke up
and I felt under strong internal pressure to express myself in English not only
in talks - for my first talk in the Sydney Open Air Speaking centre, in the
Domain, I learnt by heart about 10 pages I had written on human rights, but I
had also difficulties in expressing myself in writing in English and knew no
one with the same interests, prepared to help me correct my drafts. That can be
a major obstacle. So then I did not dare to write a whole book in English or to
translate my 1962 first peace book, written in German, but merely to write some
short contributions for the 2 first issues of my PEACE PLANS series, then very
short, only about the length of Meulen's Individualist. Later I become more and
more indifferent towards whatever mistakes still remained in my spoken or
written English. I wanted to express certain ideas and simply did it, unaided,
as well as I could, without too frequently resorting to dictionaries, offering
flawed texts rather than none. That is still my attitude now, after I finally
gained some fluency. Others had always the chance to express these ideas better
than I could - if they really wanted to. I wanted to convey ideas rather than a
flawless English. But I often envied those who had some good and interested
editors handy. To some extent my correspondence, resulting from my PEACE PLANS
series, helped me. But I was never successful in writing letters to the editors
of major journals, nor interested in writing for other small journals, and so
concentrated most of my writing efforts on my own little journal, whose tiny
circulation was cut almost to zero when I converted to microfiche, with its
policy of publishing only upon demand, apart from an initial small batch, to
have some duplicates on hand for immediate mailing. That also cut out most
sending of free samples, because I no longer wanted to waste copies of the
original small batches of microfiche duplicates, usually only 100 for a PEACE
PLANS issue, by sending them to prospective readers, because I knew most of
them would not have a reading machine or bother to buy one or use the one in
the nearest library. Since then I served my own "publishing"
convenience rather than their reading habits.
Those more interested in the medium than in the message will have to do
without my messages. However at least all of the first 20 PEACE PLANS issues
are now also available by e-mail and some others as well or online. And anyone
interested is invited to scan in, duplicate, and distribute and translate, in
any medium those texts from my microfiche which are no longer or were never
copyrighted, any of my own texts and any of those of Ulrich von Beckerath and
of my father, Kurt Helmut Zube. I am copyrights holder for the latter 2 as
well. Important ideas, to become effective, should be freely shared, as widely
as possible. - J.Z., 23.5.03.)
--------------
Do you think, that
the term "banking" is, still today, well enough and generally
understood as equal with "note-issuing"?
In Germany the public
has long forgotten, that, in old times, banks issued notes. When
Rittershausen explains in his lectures the difference between the
"banking-principle" and the "currency-principle" (*), the
students want long explanations. Issuing paper money by the government has
become a "self-evident premise". They are unable to think that
other people than government officials could also issue paper money.
Thank you very much for the interesting clipping.
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
The old German
banking rule was: The amount of outstanding notes should be equal to the bank's
current income, so that every day the public has the possibility to use the
notes as a means of payment at the bank itself. In the case of a distrust or a
discount of the notes - - what is practically the same - - the bank's debtors
will buy the cheap notes, repay their loans at par with the notes and get a
profit for the amount of the discount. In some days the notes, together with
their discount, have thus disappeared from circulation. Since then no discount
will be seen any more, there will be room for fresh issues.
Bth.
-------------------------------
(J.Z.: However, if the discount was considerable, then this
will be remembered and, at least for a while, there will be fewer ready
acceptors for new issues at par or, for some time, a small discount may
continue, until the remaining distrust and apprehension have finally
disappeared. For that reason, the issuers will always try to do their best to
prevent any considerable discount from occurring at all or lasting very long -
by maximising all reflux opportunities for the own notes and also by buying
them up with other kinds of notes received in their transactions.
They do want their own notes to be "as good as
gold", and to be accepted as such, at least locally. The advertising
effect of this alone will be already of an immense commercial value to them,
part of their good "reputation", their own "good name" or
"brand-recognition". They would have to pay a fortune in advertising
costs and cheap quality goods offers, to achieve this reputation otherwise.
I do wonder what the "promises" to deliver goods
or services, by politicians would be worth, if
a) they were expressed in their own service vouchers and
b) they were not backed by tax-robbery powers nor
c) supported by legal tender for their promises to deliver
and when
d) all kinds of political services would be offered
competitively, by various volunteer communities.
I guess that, as some kind of desired "insurance
services", on a voluntary subscription basis, using
"subscription" and "pay-out" money of these competing
"insurance companies", all among voluntary members or acceptors only
and without any territorial privileges and powers, many of them could continue
for a long time and for each territory, there would tend to be not only one but
dozens of them. Later, some of them, might regionally, nationally or even
internationally federate or confederate and thus their total number might
become reduced again, towards their optimum number. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
(*)(J.Z.: There are different versions of both. I have not
yet seen a complete tabulation of all of them. - J.Z., 23..5.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
20. 11. 1949.
My
letter of yesterday.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
we do agree that
purely technical improvements may be decisive for social progress, insofar as
this progress means the spread of progressive ideas.
(J.Z.: Yes, I do agree, too, insofar as e.g. alternative,
cheap and yet very powerful media are taken up for the spread of
libertarian ideas, i.e., seen and used as alternative, cheap and
powerful freedom of expression and information opportunities. Alas, for e.g.
microfiche, floppy disks and CD-ROMs that has not yet been the case, as far as
their use for all kinds of libertarian writings is concerned. Why are most
libertarian minds so stagnant & apathetic in this respect? Can you
supply a satisfactory explanation? Like gold bugs to gold redemptionism, they
seem to want to stick with paper tigers or websites or short e-mail messages only,
and never even bother to make objective cost and convenience comparisons
between all the alternative media now at their disposal. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
In your book you
pointed out to what degree some technical improvements in banking contributed
to develop that spirit of economical independence and by that of political
liberty in England and perhaps more so in Scotland, until the act of 1844
stopped that development. (100 years ago the apprehension of many, but today seen
only by you, the last champion of monetary liberty in Great Britain.)
If Gibbon would have written only the one remark:
"If the monks,
who brought to the emperor Justinian silk worms from China to
Constantinople, would have brought him from there the art of making paper and,
by that, paper money, the world's history might have been a very different one
and more honourable mankind." (I quote from my bad memory. Gibbon's book
being burnt, he
would still have been one of greatest historians.
The banker's Option
Clause is such a technical improvement. When at first applied, it seemed to
be not an improvement, but the result of
the wickedness of smart businessmen trying to evade their obligations.
It was the same thing with the valve gear of steam-engines,
invented by the boy Potter, so that he might get time to play, instead of
fulfilling his "duty" to work at the stopcock of a Newcomen machine.
It is said, he got a hiding (B. wrote: "he get smashes"! - J.Z.) for
its invention, but technology would have remained almost at the level of old
Rome, without Potter's invention.
Since about 200
years, it has been well observed that there arise commercial crises in periods
of about 10 - 11 years. Each of these crises was accompanied by a breakdown of
private banking and allowed to grow, in the minds of many average men, the
desire to replace private banking by state institutions. (The State, in the
minds of most men, and for about 200 years, plays the role of God.) In a very
great part of the world State Institutions really have replaced private
institutions (with more seeming than real exceptions in the USA) and economic
as well as political slavery has been
the immediate and natural consequence. We know today, that a general use of
reformed option clauses could have prevented the crises.
At the first stage
of development, the option clause was a means to protect the banker against the
withdrawal of gold or silver by merchants and others. The protection was very
imperfect insofar as the then used option clause provided merely a delay instead
of a prevention. It is the very great merit of W. B. Greene, Benjamin R. Tucker
and his school to have demonstrated that the delay may be extended ad libitum,
in other words, it may be replaced by the refusal to make good notes in any
other way than by accepting them at par.
The cheque business
of banks exhibited the general nature of the danger against which option
clauses, in their original form, should but could not protect bankers.
The general danger is: Being legally obliged to procure cash
at a time which does not depend upon the wish of the banker and for an amount
which he can only procure by a lucky chance.
The probability of that lucky chance may be 99 %, that's in this
case no different from the chance zero. A chance of 99 % means: In one case
of hundred the chance is against him and then the disaster may be
greater than it would have been, if the chance would be 50 %, which nobody
would have take for zero.
In reality, the
danger here to be considered is of a more general nature. It is the danger that
a man is legally obliged to procure goods of a certain quality at a certain
time (at least a time not depending upon his will), although he can obtain
these goods only by a lucky chance.
Example: A merchant has in his shop goods like sugar, flour
etc., which his customers daily use, to the value of 1,000 Dollars. Obviously,
he can issue purchasing tickets for an amount of 1,000 Dollars, especially if
he is the only merchant in the village. (Stephen Pearl Andrews treated
such cases, but failed in sufficiently generalising them.) In the case of a
panic, which need not always be caused by a sudden distrust in the merchant's
honesty, when everybody will get rid of the tickets, he can make them good at
once. But if the merchant possesses only goods for daily use up to the value of
500 Dollars and other articles for 500 Dollars, then, in the case of a panic,
the ticket-bearers will feel, unless the merchant had stated quite openly and
sincerely on the tickets, that not the whole amount of them was covered by
articles of for daily consumption, ready for sale.
Maybe the judge of the village will punish the merchant for
having deceived the inhabitants; but the judge will not punish him if he states
that he will exchange the tickets for goods of day to day use - as far as he can.
The latter words would constitute the option clause here required. A
clause reserving merely a delay would not be sufficient.
(Why not, in this case? He could reorder the needed quantity
of consumer goods within a few days! But a variety of suitable clauses, fit for
every occasion, would be advisable. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
An obvious fraud it
would be if the merchant would issue tickets for an amount of 2,000 Dollars,
although he possesses only goods to the value of 1,000 Dollars.
But suppose that,
normally, the stock of the shop would be sold in 3 months. Then an option
clause in the following form would be supportable:
a) for an amount of 500 Dollars of the tickets, stating:
"This ticket may be
exchanged for goods in my shop."
b.) for an amount of 500 Dollars of the tickets, stating:
"This ticket may be
exchanged for goods in my shop 3 months after the date of issue."
c.) for an amount of 500 Dollars, of the tickets, stating:
"This ticket may be
exchanged for goods in my shop 6 months after the date of issue."
d.) for an amount of 500 Dollars of the tickets, stating:
"This ticket may be
exchanged for goods in my shop 9 months after the date of issue."
There are still
some details into which a complete theory of option clauses must enter, but I
think that from the foregoing it will be already be clear what I mean:
Time and quality
promised should not be dependent upon lucky chances
That is no new
theory and I think that in English text books of banking it will be contained
no less than 1 have found it frequently expressed in German textbooks. But the
truth is, everywhere that banks are in business: The theory is neglected by
"practical men", perhaps most of all in Germany. Here the crisis of
1932 was produced by this negligence.
The bankers declared: Yes - - we promised to the people, who
deposited money with us, to deliver on demand or after 3 months or after 6
months - - as the case may have been - - gold coins or gold-valued notes. It is
also true that we lent out the deposited money on long term loans. And then the
depositors came, demanded the fulfilment of our promises, and our debtors refer
to the long-term conditions, that is, they will not pay before the date due,
And we owe gold! We conclude: The gold standard has failed!!!
The only man in
Germany, who opposed what was happening, Rittershausen, answered: What
has failed, you rascals: You have failed! Not the here innocent gold
standard! There are bankers in Germany, who never forgot this and still work
and speak against him, as he experienced a year ago.
(J.Z.: Usually B. expressed R.'s remark in the following
form: "Not the gold standard has failed but those to whom it was
entrusted." The same could be said about the paper money value standard
and also the exchange medium of all central banks: Not the originally selected
standard (a certain purchasing power, however defined) has failed, but those to
whom it was entrusted. As for a sufficient supply of exchange media: No
centralistic and monopolistic supplier can ever offer it, sufficiently and
evenly to all people in a country. While dollar remains nominally a dollar, a
pound a pound, a mark a mark, the purchasing power of these paper
"standards" has been systematically and greatly reduced by all those
to whom it was entrusted - and they got their high salaries and pensions for
this kind of disservice to a whole country and all its people! Not one of them
has been held responsible for their actions. The "sheple" once again
sanctioned their being fleeced and finally slaughtered. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
-------------------
You know the
biological law, called: The fundamental biogenetic law. It says: Every
individual, from the moment of its generation to the end of its youth (for men
about theirs 25th year) repeats (roughly - J.Z.) the development of
the species from which it descends. The discovery of this law is now by many
ascribed to
Haeckel, but it was already known in the 18th century. I found it expressed in clear terms
and as a well known observation in a work of Kant, I do not know any
more in which one. But the name: "Biogenetisches Grundgesetz"
is by Haeckel.
This law - - as was
often stated - - is of a very general application. It seems that no sphere of
human activity is quite exempt from it. It applies also to banking. (Private
banking with the issuing of notes.) If it will be revived in the future, it
will (and must) begin with the issuing of tickets by merchants. Then the
merchants may organise their issuing department as a special branch. At last
this department will become a bank. That development will, perhaps, require
decades, as it did, in many cases, 100 and 200 years ago.
(I hold that this process can be very much speeded up - if a
serious attempt is made by enough people who are sufficiently informed about
monetary theory and techniques and how to overcome the likely opposition to
this freedom. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
A difference will
be - - nature never quite repeats itself - - that the option clauses of
the future will be of another kind than the old ones. They will now be more
scientifically framed. Merchants, still more so than note-issuing bankers,
should take care not to promise more than they can deliver and should not speak
of a "lack of trust" when a risk that they took, quite unnecessarily,
becomes effective. Technical requirements cannot be replaced by moral demands,
and if a merchant promises too much, then he cannot expect to make good his
levity by inviting the public to keep their trust and to voluntarily delay its
legal claims.
Nietzsche (who also
offered some good sayings) remarked: Honesty is the youngest of virtues.
And really: One is astonished to what degree honesty was
lacking in the business of the best people in old
times, merchants and rulers, priests and teachers.
When Machiavelli told the princes of his time: Always keep
your promises, even if circumstances compel you to be cruel, that seems really
to have been something new at that time.
The generally adopted principle of banking in the 18th
and the 19th century was: Promise always redemption of notes into
gold or silver on demand, although you have no more than 1/3rd
of the amount of outstanding notes in cash reserves, that principle indicated
the natural mentality of its time, when people sincerely believed that lack of
honesty may be replaced by piety and that God will do miracles (like preventing
risks from being realized) in favour of those, who worship him in the
prescribed forms. That believing itself was held to be meritorious and was so
represented by the churches. One tried to justify this by some utterings of
Jesus, which he, obviously, meant in a purely medical sense, when he spoke of faith.
(Matthew 9, 22 and many others.)
The fundamental
mentality of an age represents itself in all details, religious,
economic and even scientific. Of the latter Goethe gives examples, when
he says:
"Acknowledged
errors are perpetuated as truths in science", whereby he meant certain
optical theories of that time.
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 21.11.1949. Your letter of 10. c
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
Mr. Gibson did not print your article in the November
issue of "The Scots Independent". His own article on pages 1 & 2
was an important one - - admitted - - but all other articles were of
less importance than your article would have been.
---------------
I think Aldred a most
important person. He has courage and takes himself serious. As history
proves, that can be sufficient to arrive at the top of a revolutionary
movement within few hours, although a day before he did not know himself that
this would be his role. Such a good connoisseur of world's history as you (*),
probably knows more examples than I do. The leaders of the French Revolution
were all more driven to their leadership than by doing something themselves to
get to the places where they finally acted and died (1/10th of the
members of the Convention as - calculated by Carlyle).
(*) (J. Z.: People like to hear themselves praised - but
often make this rather difficult. However, a few such words cost nothing and do
make opinion-exchanges more pleasant. - J.Z., 2.6.03.)
You named Bakunin,
Herzen and Kropotkin.
Bakunin certainly believed himself to be an Anarchist and
his followers believed it too. But when the Commune of Paris asked him for a
social program, he delivered a plan not different from dull Sovietism, as can
still be read
in his Collected Works. Printed at Stock in Paris, 3
volumes, which I possessed.
Nearly the some is to be said of Kropotkin. I refer to the
chapter on social revolution in his "La Conquête du pain". I
possessed it too.
Alexander Herzen is of a very different kind. He owned large
estates before he became a socialist (the word taken in the sense of Benjamin
R. Tucker) and always had the real economy in thought and mind. The liberation
of the serfs, under the noble Alexander II seemed to all revolutionaries to be
insufficient. They demanded a complete revolution. Alexander Herzen, on
the contrary, entered at once into the technical, that is, economic and legal details
and gave valuable advice, after having studied the liberation laws of the year
1807 in Prussia. In his memoirs he reports an economic victory over Rothschild,
amusing to be read, while all his friends regarded Rothschild as a kind of
almighty devil, who, perhaps, can be killed in a revolution (that was their
intention) but never be conquered in a commercial fight. By his victory Herzen
transferred a great part of his money from Russia to Paris. Herzen's writings
are still worth reading. Many of Bakunin's writings not, or merely for the
purpose of special studies in old literature.
Malvide von Meysenbug, an author of quality and for a time
the governess of his children, spoke always with high esteem of Alexander
Herzen.
You say: The activities of the Bakunin, Kropotkin etc. did
much to land us in our present mess. I think that these people, having really
no program, did in practice not do much harm, but they inspired in many heads
the idea, that the State is not as necessary as it is represented
by average politicians and economists. And that's good and deserves praise.
With much pleasure
I read what you said about the Jews. I agree completely. I, too, think that
Jews are by no means the best businessmen and concerning the theory of business
they (usually, like everyone else - J.Z.) understand nothing. Germans are much
better businessmen. Also, it must be said, that all economic qualities which in
Germany the Anti-Semites ascribed to Jews, they, and others of that milieu,
displayed themselves to a surprising degree during the Nazi-Time. Hitler began
with some Millions in debts, just like Alexander of Macedonia, Caesar
and Napoleon III. This is an excellent means to chain the interests of powerful
men to the aims of the political debtor. Hitler, from the first moment, did not
forget the commercial side of the revolution. He became, after a few months,
proprietor of all important Journals in Germany and by that one of the richest
men in Europe. Jews, perhaps would have been more reluctant or would have
occupied themselves with less important details.
(J.Z.: Hitler's regime did concern itself with small but
important commercial details as well. Instance: To make sure that all NSDAP
members regularly paid their dues, even those who had been forced to join the
party or were "collectively signed up", as B. reported in one of the
above letters, the receipt for their last membership payment was pasted to the
framework of their entrance doors. Most people were already terrorised by what
they had heard about the treatment meted out to dissenters of all kinds in the
first concentration camps. Thus these "due" fees were paid very
punctually. Moreover, they could be easily jacked up. Another aspect of this
"small" detail, with about every tenth German a party member - more actually, if one considers the number
under- age people - and everyone of these being at least under the suspicion of
being not only formally a member but a Nazi at heart, frank and public discussions
between a considerable number of people became rather rare. The presence of
these numerous party members, almost everywhere, tended to shut up dissenters
and constituted part of the terror system. Naturally, there were other and less
well advertised and really convinced or well paid informers. - The Hitler
salute was a compulsory and "disarming" salute: Right arm raised
shoulder high, hand flat, obviously neither holding a revolver or a grenade.
And the throwing of bunches of flowers at Hitler or other Nazi bosses was
strictly prohibited - because they might contain grenades. Nazis had well
studied repressive methods, better than most libertarians have studied
liberating ones! - Mere details, yes, but important ones, in a negative way! -
J.Z., 12.2.03.)
Marx says in his
dissertation on "the Jew Question" (*) that Anti-Semitism is always
connected with the prejudice that Jews are "masters of money". He
said: Let us destroy the monopoly of money and Anti-Semitism is extinguished. I
think, that here he was in the right. But how the money-monopoly could
be destroyed, Marx never said.
(On the contrary, he wanted to make it worse via central
banking and legal tender - in the hands of the "Diktatorship of the
proletariat", that is, in his own hands, as another and very powerful
means of power over the proletariat. - (*) I bought in the 50's, in East
Berlin, a Reclam anthology of his writings containing that essay. The pages
containing that essay were all blacked out! An example of Communist censorship
of Marx, in East Berlin, under communist rule! - J.Z., 12.3.03.)
I often said to Zander (whom I believe to be no real Jew - -
his ancestors may have been Spaniards): Call the system of the Four Bills
"the Jewish system of providing money ", and the Jews in the whole
world will be honoured as much as they are now in contempt. He took that into
consideration, but as he was in London, he did nothing.
"Anti-
Semitism is the Socialism of Blockheads" (fools - Dummkoepfe - J.Z.) said
Professor Sombart, a good economist. (He did not take the word in the sense of
state-socialism or state-capitalism.)
(If I remember it right: "Anti-Semitism ist der
Sozialismus der dummen Kerle." -
J.Z.)
There you are very
right: The history of the oppression of Jews (by Christians and race fanatics)
is the blackest page of European history. When I heard Hitler's speeches
on the radio, I often got the impression that humanity, which does not find out
a means to stop that (him? - J.Z.), deserves no better fate than to be
extinguished by one of the great catastrophes like that which killed off the
Mammoth, the Ichthyosaurs and the others, now to be seen (as far as the bombs
did not destroy them) in the museums.
-----------
Concerning my reply
to Drysdale' article, I see well that it cannot appear in the
"Malthusian". I was already
more than surprised to find my letter printed in that paper and saw that
English impartiality is no mere phrase. But. of course - - one cannot
demand from the Malthusian that he propagate Anti-Malthusianism.
To write a shorter
letter on Mr. Drysdale's article will be difficult. Take my letter to your
shelves. I am content if you find that some of the ideas (I am very
pleased to have such a predecessor as Edwin Cannan - - I did not know it
some weeks ago - - ) are not without foundation.
----------------
Drysdale praises
Bacon, Franklin, Jefferson and others, for their warnings about overpopulation.
If England would have retained her small population at the time of Bacon, then
she would have been conquered at least 300 years later by Ireland or earlier by
France. Many pious Protestant Malthusians would then have become Catholics
and, for mere religious reasons, condemned Malthusianism.
Malthus himself would probably not have been born. It America would have retained her
standard of population at the time when Franklin printed his warnings, it would
today be inhabited by a mere 3 million people. Then some Indian tribe, after
being better armed than it was at the time of Franklin, would have thrown the
whole colony into the sea.
In the book "Plenty of People", by Warren S.
Thompson, 1944, I find on the pages 233/235 valuable military
considerations about Malthusianism. Thomson - - in general - - seems a
Malthusian, does not know Cannan (in this case he certainly would have
mentioned him) but is no blockhead. I found this book at the library of the
American Information Centre.
--------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
22. XI. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
it I would write all I thought reading the November-issue of
the Word, it would become a letter no less voluminous than Word itself.
Aldred is
now 63 years old, as he states on page 13. Most men at that age will not change
their views any more and I think that Aldred will not be an exception. That
means here: Aldred will not be convinced that the money-question is the
most important of all.
It was in the year
1906, if my memory does not deceive me, that the "Temps Nouveaux" at
Paris - - at that time better than later
- - sent a Questionnaire to all unions of workers, which inter alia contained
these questions:
1.) Suppose, that in this year or in the next the social
revolution breaks out, all cash disappears, as is usual in every revolution,
all employers dismiss their workers and employees for lack of cash to pay them,
all communities lack cash, then nobody pays taxes, what your you do at your
place?
2.) Tramway-men - - how will you transport your comrades?
They have no money!
3.) House-wife, how will you buy victuals? Your husband is
out of work, wins victory at the barricade, but no money.
4.) Mason, will you continue to build? How will you get
paid? Certainly, you will not build gratis. Etc.
I was 24 years old
when I read It. I read too, that the Temps Nouveaux had collected all answers
and had made a book of them! May be, that Stock, Editeur, has printed it. He
was at that time an expert for revolutionary literature. The Temps Nouveaux had
said in an article, that many answers had been "valuable", but that
the general impression had been: The workers had not sufficiently understood
the importance of the problem. Aldred was 19 or 20 years old when the
questionnaire was published. Very probably he does not know it.)
Although I had no
opportunity to get the questionnaire and the printed answers, the article of
the Temps Nouveaux has, perhaps, been
for me what a spark is in the powder-barrel. I was fully convinced, that if these
questions were not solved, then every social revolution must fail. It
seemed to me as if I now understood better the history of revolutions and the
failure of most of them.
It required still
many years before I got an idea clear enough to be of practical use. That a
simple printing of State money must in every case lead to a kind of Jacobinism with
its assignats-dirigism, I saw well, but I was no etatist, on the contrary.
All classics,
Bakunin, Kropotkin, Marx, etc. here gave no hints. Obviously, they had not seen
the problem. Their program - - as bloody as it was - - was an
"armchair-program", it had nothing to do with economy. At Tucker only
I found at last some hints, how to procure means of payments it a
society where, before, they lacked completely. But Tucker, also, had not thought out a
program to finance a revolution. Perhaps he had the program but had good
reasons not to publish it.
(J.Z.: B. had finally a finished [when?] manuscript on this
subject. Alas, it burned with his library in Berlin, in 1943, as a result of an
air raid. A book with such a title might have become a best-seller in a
semi-free country and would have been smuggled into most dictatorships and most
of those already fighting them would have consulted such a work as well. -
J.Z., 13.2.03.)
For my present
views I am much indebted to this questionnaire of 1906.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
At page 15
Macfarlane says:
"I believe
quite thoroughly that membership of a party and acceptance of the party's
principle is absolutely essential if political effectiveness is to
result."
That reminds me of
an old law at Athens, given by Solon, who prescribed:
If there arises a civil war, the victorious party shall
never take revenge but be content with its victory. But those, who remained neutral,
shall be punished.
I think there is
much wisdom in that old law. In times where a civil war is to be expected, one
should belong, to a party. That was, for me, the reason for joining the
Independent Socialist Party in the year 1918, which some years later united
with the old Social Democratic Party.
(He stayed with the SPD for over 50 years but finally
resigned from it, when at last he did realize that it was almost impossible to
discuss important subjects within party circles. I believe that I microfiche-published
something on this from my collection of B.'s papers. As territorialists all political parties are
inevitably a part of the problem rather than the solution. As territorialists
they become involved in party strife, revolutions, civil wars, international
wars, and often lead to dictatorships and tyrannies. As exterritorialists and
voluntaryists they could all peacefully coexist and remain neutral, towards the
struggles of others in the same country, with each party or volunteer community
doing its things to or for itself. However, if the others struggle mass
murderously, like Muslims and Hindus in India, or different groups of Negroes
in Rwanda, then there is something to be said even for very harsh police or
military intervention to stop such slaughters, provided a rightful program is
upheld for both groups, which would require full exterritorial autonomy for
both, not just religious freedom for them. I wish that B. had discussed this
topic very extensively with M. He had, with men like Werner Ackermann, probably
also with Follin, and, maybe, others. For example, at least two arch lever
files of his correspondence with Ackermann did also get burnt with B's library
and when A. fled from Nazi Germany. Then he was, obviously, unable or unwilling
to take all his correspondence with him. So many of the most important and
still unpublished writings still got lost, even in our life-time! - J.Z.,
12.2.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
I find much in the
"Word" about an organisation of the world's governments. I do not
find hints for a constitutions that would let such a government appear as a
progressive step. Being misgoverned by a world government, instead of by a
"national" one and having civil wars instead of wars of the usual
kind, means merely the changing of names. (UN, world federalism. - J.Z.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Is banking
and the word banking in the mind of average men still connected with the
right of issuing standardised means of payment? (He had asked that question
before and, obviously, M. had not answered it. M. managed to ignore many of
B.'s questions, ideas, arguments and statements, assuming that he know better!
The minds of so many people are open on a few points of freedom and closed, at
the same time, towards many other freedom options. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Aldred now will try
to become a M.P. It's his right to try it. But now (and then! - J.Z.) he will
never have the time to enter into the details of any social reform. Also: If
Aldred tries to say what he has to say in Parliament, people will, in the most
favourable case, be astonished. Probably, they will laugh. The readers of the Word
do take him serious. He should not have left his milieu.
Aldred pledged
himself to take L 5 per week only as income. The merit of such a pledge is no
greater than that of a bird, who would pledge to clip his wings. If M.P.'s are
endowed with a greater income than workers, it is - - it really seems that in
some circles this is not yet realised - - because their expenses are so much
greater, expenses which they cannot avoid. If a M.P. is pledged to spend no
more than 5 L a week, then he must neglect his duty as a M.P. or be bribed.
Political experiences, so many hundred years old, should be known to men who
aspire to become M.P.'s.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Om Prakasha Kahol's
article "Shriyuta Guy A. Aldred" confirms the old saying: "The
Indian's worst enemy is the Indian." (As if Indians were not also very
diverse people, perhaps even more diverse than e.g. Germans, Englishmen, Jews,
Iraqi, Vietnamese, Chinese etc. - J.Z., 12.2.03.)
Kahol mentions
"the miseries of Hindus in Islamic countries." Is it prudence
when here he does not enter into details? Details would at once reveal that the
miseries have nothing to do with Islamic religion of the rulers, except
only, that they prohibit to the pious Brahmans to burn their widows alive and
that they permit butchers to kill cows. (I - - a vegetarian for decades, as far
as I have the possibility to be one - - disapprove the killing of cows, but I
think it has nothing to do with the miseries of the people, yet I know,
from Indian writings, that Hindu really consider the "murdering" of
their sacred cows as one of the Hindu miseries.)
From a book
"From Akbar to Auranzeb" (author forgotten) - - the book is burnt - -
I learnt, that in the old Mogul State the Hindu were much better governed than
in countries governed by Brahmans. They also had all religious freedom, except
such as required the burning of widows alive, so that they had to do it
secretly, what they often did. I can hardly believe that modern Mohammedans
treat the Hindus worse than their ancestors did, since religious tolerance has
always been a Mohammed political principle. (A wonderful invention of Mohammed:
You want to keep your religion?? Well - - that costs you so and so much
per head and per year - - generally a gold coin. At once the financial interest
of the ruler was connected with religious tolerance.
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 23.11.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I read a little in Pagan Christs of Robertson.
A book from which very much is to be learnt and from which I
took many details which until now were unknown to me. Of course: If one is much
interested in religions - - as I am - - has occupied oneself with religion for
many decades, then one is a rigorous critic.
What I first missed
in the book was a mentioning
a.) of Volney (Les Ruines, 1791),
b) of Dupuis (De l'origine de tous les cultes, 1795),
c.) of Bastian, many writings, about 1870.
(I once saw a catalog of an English book dealer specialising
on atheist etc. literature. Its catalog was so extensive - containing hundreds
to thousands of titles, that I thought by myself: Even with microfiching, I
could reproduce only a tiny fragment of scarce old tracts of this kind. So I
will not even try. Any author of this kind will probably have read only a
fraction of all this literature. Thus B. should not have been too surprised
when in Robertson's book some of B.'s favourite titles were not reviewed or
even mentioned. All-over, the extensive atheist, agnostic, deist etc.
propaganda has had not much or not enough effect over the last 200 years. All
too many religions still flourish and all too many of them are still
intolerant. We still live in a world that has several religious wars or civil
wars at the same time, with at least fanatics of opposing religions being
murderously engaged and, as usual, all too many innocents being murdered. If
they only wiped themselves out, sparing their kids, I for one would not weep
for them. Progress consists largely in many ordinary people growing up without
any religious inclination and commitment and, mostly, do get away with it. And
they are not turned into dangerous monsters thereby but, behave, on the whole,
at least as good, if not better, than most religious people do. At least none
of them has any religious motive to commit wrongs against other people or to do
them any harm. But I do concede, that e.g., orthodox Chinese and orthodox Jews
have what is probably the lowest rate of juvenile delinquents among them. So
there is at least something good about these religions. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
Volney was
perhaps the first, who explained that the forms of early and modern
religions are very essentially framed by old astrology and even of astronomy,
Christian no less than Jewish and Indian. He explained, too, that the
content of old and modern religion was essentially magic, that is, the art
by ceremonies, prayers, etc. to win influence on destiny, gods, spirits, etc.
Dupuis still
more worked out the influence of astrology and gave most interesting and
important details.
Bastian
showed that the same social and economic conditions are always related with the
same religion. Both are a unity. The one cannot be changed without changing the
other. It is a ""half-truth to say, that the religion of a group was
framed by its economic conditions. It must also be said, that religion framed
the social conditions. Little differences must not be taken too serious, so
that in one community a victim is really eaten up, in honour of a god, or to
please him, and in another community the victim is replaced by a cake,
sometimes in the form of a man, sometimes in form of a sheep and sometimes
simply in the shape of a round host.
Bastian showed, too, that if a Europe and at a distant
Polynesian island the same religion prevailed (in the eyes of an ethnologist
the same, not in those of missionaries) then one must not believe that in old
times there has been an emigration. The same external conditions are for men of
the same kind connected with the same religion, details as resurrection of
gods, sacrificing gods, etc. included.
On his voyages
Bastian collected an immense material.
--------------
To me it seems that
until now the influence of philosophy and science upon religion
has not yet been sufficiently investigated, also not by Robertson. My
impression is that in all societies of a certain state of culture and
civilisation, there are individuals that do not believe in the popular religion
but are religious reformers. Mostly, they are social and economic reformers
too. Many of them seem to adhere to the old religion, so Franklin,
who probably himself believed to be a pious Christian. But really the religion
of reformers is always different from the religion of the people. If Franklin
would have lived 50 years later, when the slave question played a
greater role than at his time, he would have become an abolitionist, and
abolitionists were - - quite rightly so - - considered to be 100 % heretics by
the pious Protestants of the South, most Negroes included. On the other hand,
there were many abolitionists - - John Brown and others - - who considered the
Protestants of the South as heathens, misusing Christian principles. Franklin
would have belonged to the latter party and would have written a book in which
he would have explained the complete diversity of the two American Religions.
----------------------
In a book that
appeared 20 or 30 years ago, a French author described how the religion of the
French changed essentially after the great revolution, also in Catholic
circles, which had maintained Catholicism under risk of life in the years of
the terror. All forms were retained, but the contents changed very much.
The latter cannot be easily detected,
since in the eyes of the contemporaries it seemed merely to be an increasing
religious indifference. They confounded - - as usual - - Church and Religion.
To what degree Catholicism really changed is proven by the American Institutes
of the Jesuits for Investigations in evolution-theory. Their labours are
acknowledged as very good.
(But in six USA States it is prohibited to teach or to
defend at public schools or universities Darwin's or Spencer's theories.)
And the forms of Jesuitism are still the same as at the time
of Loyola.
At the Carnegie
Library of New York I found, in the year 1911 a book: "The religion of a
gentleman - - a very good book - - in which the author tried to detect the real
religion of a gentleman under the different forms or faiths of our time.
--------------
We agree that e.g.
the religion of a market-maid in Cologne and a market-maid in old Rome - -
heathen-time - - were and are
essentially the same. Perhaps friends of antiquity will pretend, that the old
religion - - as far as market-maidens are concerned, was better than the
modern. May be that they are in the right, although I am inclined to think that
the taste for bloody circus-plays has diminished a little.
---------------
We know little of
the real religion of old reformers.
It may be that they were more similar to ours than
many assume. The verse in Psalms 14 and 53 prove, that the national demon,
3,000 years ago, was no longer revered by many who, perhaps were reformers.
--------------
Robertson does not
say much of the life of Jesus, but more of his "resurrection"
and other dogmas. Many details of Jesus' life are much too human-like as
to allow us to ascribe them to myths taken from pagan traditions. I think that
the crucifixion was no sacrifice or, more exactly spoken, a
self-sacrifice, or - - if one will insist it was - - then no more so than the
self-sacrifice of Nihilists and Anarchists some decades ago.
If the crucifixion is no longer taken as a sacrifice to
reconcile an angry God, then it cannot any more be set into a parallel with the
sacrifices of men in old rites and modern Hindu rites.
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 24.11.1949. My letter of yesterday
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
let me add, to my letter of 23. cr., that I - - of course - - admit that the churches interpreted
the crucifixion as if it was a sacrifice to reconcile "God".
But I think, that such an interpretation should not prevent historians from
acknowledging the crucifixion as a historical fact, if it is sufficiently
certified, or to ascribe to the reports a probability of truth according to
their historical merit. Here differences of opinion are unavoidable. I
understand it well if a historian says: A book in which resurrections from
death are reported is for me no reason not to investigate the realty of other stories
reported in the same book or to ascribe the stories a degree of probability.
And yet, I thing: Although Homer reports many impossible things,
historians are inclined to believe that some of his stories are true. If
- - to give an example - - Homer reports of his hero Achilles such a low
character as is displayed by the dishonouring of the dead Hector, one may take
it for truth. Such things are not invented by benevolent glorifiers. The
historian may take it for truth, although, together with the same story, Homer
reports that the goddess Aphrodite, by a magic liquid, prevented the corpse of
Hector from being torn.
I am inclined to
ascribe a probability of about 99 % to the report of crucifixion and a smaller
probability to the details reported, although to most of them a probability of
more than 50 %. That there are clear contradictions does not reduce the
probability to zero, as is the case with the "vinegar mixed with
gall." (Matt. 27, 34) - which is in contradiction to Mark. 15, 23, where
is spoken of wine mingled with myrrh. I think it is more than 50 % probable
that a narcotic was offered to Jesus.
Jesus' last words: "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani"
are certainly not words ascribed by a myth-reporter to a god, entering into his
heavenly kingdom. They are words of a despairing man overwhelmed by his
sufferings. I am inclined to believe that these words have really been spoken.
(Probability of 95 %, I think.)
------------------
Gibbon says:
The Christians after Constantine expressed to the heathens their contempt that
they were never ready to die for their
religion, as so many Christians were. (Gibbon estimates for the whole Roman
Empire about 2,000 - - which I think to be a too small number - - but in any
case the Nazis and the Inquisition produced for their religion
more victims than Nero and his successors.) A man, who is very far from the
idea of dying for his religion, is not so far from giving up this
religion for great advantages or in cases of great danger. So, very probably
the Roman priests thought, when the Roman emperors had accepted Christendom. I
think, that they were even among the
first to become Christians, to change the temples into churches and to keep
their jobs. And they - - I assume - - were those who brought the many
pagan elements into Christianity, so many that today it is impossible to find
out, what, originally, have been the teaching of Jesus. They certainly were
supported by the great number of "fidels", who, too, became
Christians for very practical reasons and were quite content to find in the new
religion nothing was changed than the names.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
26. 11. 1949.
To the Editor
of the Times,
Sir, - what Mr.
Henry Meulen, in his letter published in your issue of 16.11.49, recommended
for England, viz. a repeal of the laws now guaranteeing to a single institute a
monopoly for supplying the country with means of payment, would be at least of
the same beneficial effect for Germany.
At the time when the laws concerning Central Banks were
issued, they were meant as laws concerning paper money only, while coins
were considered as the normal currency.
(J.Z.: For paper money with legal tender, not only should
the issue be restricted to a monopolist but no one should be authorised to
issue any of it. Legal tender for any exchange media should apply ONLY towards
their issuers. Towards all others it should be optional and discountable,
regardless of what medium is used for it, paper, metal, plastic, electronic
communications etc. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
As long as every goldmine contributed to supply the country
with means of payment, these laws created no monopoly.
(J.Z.: It did, for means of payment that were printed on
paper and in the usual denominations and standardised way.
Not an absolute
monopoly, indeed, for all means of payment, but only for these very important
ones. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
The monopoly arose at the moment when gold coins were no
longer in circulation. (I think that he should have mentioned silver and copper
coins as well. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
Experience shows now, that the flow of money from a
monopolistic centre to the individual obeys different economic laws from those
by which buying and selling brought coins from one individual to another.
For instance: Several months after the first issue of fresh
notes in this year in Germany, most employers found difficulties in getting
cash to pay wages with. For many of them these difficulties are still far from
having been removed and an economically quite unnecessary degree of
unemployment was and still is caused by these difficulties.
(J.Z.: I doubt that one should concede the idea of
"economically necessary unemployment" in any way except when it
refers to people who are only employed under legal compulsion, although
incompetent or compulsorily paid above the market rate of wages for their
skills and efforts. In a real economy such people should not and would not be
employed in these jobs and at these wages. Such employment is not economically
necessary and it is rather economically necessary to end it, and to that
extent, their unemployment, regarding such jobs, is "economically
necessary". At least at present I cannot think of other examples. - J.Z.,
13.2.03.)
The idea of a
monetary reform in German may be extended so that Germany as well as England
would get very great and immediate advantages, not the least being, that every
import from Germany to England would enforce an export from England for exactly
the imported amount. Thus the greatest import could never cause unemployment n
England.
The means would be the following: Imports from Germany to
England are to be paid by English firms with certificates stating:
"This certificate
will be accepted by the firm ……… for the
value of ………… (Pounds, Dollars, Marks,
as circumstances may require) in its business, from the bearer, in payment for
goods bought from the firm, for debts with the firm or services rendered by the
firm."
Technical details, as to the numbering of the certificates
and their subdivision into appropriate amounts (say, L 10 each) cannot be dealt
with here.
For England the advantage would be that, by using such
certificates, the danger of unemployment through imports would be removed.
For both countries it would bring the advantage that the
procuring of foreign exchange would no longer be a problem, insofar as their
mutual trade is concerned.
Discounting
certificates based on the - - by no means new - - "acceptance
principle" would be easy under a system of Free Banking, that is, a system
of free issue of notes without cours forcé. Under the present banking system it
would be difficult and perhaps impossible.
I am, Sir,
yours faithfully - signed: U. v. Beckerath, ….
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 26.
11. 1949. Your letter of 16. 11.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
here enclosed you receive a copy of my letter to the Editor
of the Times.
------------
From the Economist
I learn that the amount of outstanding notes in Great Britain is now about
1,300,000,000 L. Suppose, today the Bank of England would be closed and Free
Banking would supply Great Britain with currency.
Let us further suppose, that then, also, the amount of
outstanding notes would be about 1,300 M. L.
Let us further suppose, that in future long-term credits
would no longer be provided in the now usual way but by note-issuing of Free
Banks. Of course, then the amount of 1,300 M. would gradually be increased. Is
there a limit, expressible in numbers, to what the amount of outstanding notes
may be increased and - - if it be so - - what is the limit. How shall further
long-term credits be provided, if that limit is attained?
-----------
The selling price
of gold of the Bank of England is now 252 shillings per ounce troy. The value
of the now circulating currency is correspondingly:
20 x 1,300,000,000 =
103,412,000 ounces gold. That is,
per capita, about 2 ounces fine gold.
252
In the year 1926
the amount of outstanding notes was about 170 Million L or:
170 : 45 = 3.8
L per capital
At that time the
price per ounce of gold being = 84.82 Shill., the value in ounces per capita
was:
3.8 x 20
: 84.82 = 0.9 ounces.
The latter seems
normal for England. If the ounce-value of the outstanding notes is too high,
there exists a tendency to devaluate the money unit. I think that there exists
in England still such a tendency, although it may not be known to economists or
to the government.
At the inflation
time, I supposed an amount of gold as normal and when the amount of paper money
divided by the quotation of the Dollar surpassed the normal amount, I expected
a depreciation. The procedure very seldom failed.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 27.
11. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
that in Berlin the food supply is now really better
than it has been, you may learn from the here enclosed leaflet, where the Heumann-Society
recommends its slimming pills. Some months ago very few women
would have needed such pills. Now they want them. (You know that
exaggerated slenderness is not a defect of German women, at least not of 90 %
of them.)
------------------
Rittershausen sends me a pamphlet "The question of a
free gold market", by Walter Spahr, Professor of economics, New York Un.
From caption and contents is to be seen that the words
"Free Gold Market" in the USA still are used in their former sense,
which includes a bullion market.
Spahr is an adversary of a free gold market. At page 9 he
says:
"Just what is
to be gained by purchasing this gold in its natural state and at a price above
35 dollars is not clear."
For this professor it is not clear (but I am inclined to
believe, that he is not so blocked as he represents himself in that pamphlet),
to all others it is. A quite unscientific girl would reply: "To be gained
is, for the seller, the difference between 35 dollars and the selling price.
For the buyer is to be gained the safety of being protected against further
depreciations of the paper dollar."
Clear is, too, that the professor is an etatist (statist -
J.Z.) and does not acknowledge men's natural monetary rights and probably has
no notion of the existence of such rights. More than 90 % of all professors at
all universities in all countries are now statists.
Etatism says: What, buying and selling???!!! These are
privileges of free men. For subjects like you, apportionment
(allocation, rationing - J.Z.) is the right thing. And if he dares not yet to
speak so today, then he will speak so tomorrow.
-----------------
You know J. G. Fichte as a liberal and logical
thinker. But Fichte also wrote a plan for a totalitarian State (which he
honestly believed to be the most liberal and practically possible State), in
which he came quite logically to totalitarianism, merely by starting from the
doctrine that prices must be watched and, eventually prescribed, because
the market has obviously been unable to supply the people sufficiently.
If anyone does not believe in monetary freedom, e.g., denies
the right of individuals to offer their goods and labour to others in the form
of notes, with which he pays and which he accepts in payments to himself at
par, or if he denies the individual' right to choose any basis of value to
price his goods by it and goods of others, too (goods and services), then the
inconsequent (inconsistent, dogmatist? - J.Z.) is inevitably led to modern
plan-despotism. Fichte's book, printed in 1800, is named: "Der
geschlossene Handelsstaat? (The closed trading State? - J.Z.)
I know that it has been translated into English.
-----------------
Very
faithfully yours signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
10.12.1949.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
Turgenev's book is probably that which in English
translation was called "Virgin Soil". The German translators
gave it a different title: "Die neue Generation"
and "Neuland", the latter corresponding pretty well to
"Virgin Soil."
----------------
Christianity.
When I was a boy, I knew two old ladies - - sisters - - who saw Jesus
Christ in every corner. No doubt, that they really saw him, and if one
of the sisters did not see Jesus Christ there, where the other saw him,
the latter demanded of her so long:
"Do you not yet see him?? I see him quite distinctly!! Oh, look
again!!!" - until the other also saw him. If they would have lived
in the pious USA, there would have come into being a new sect, whose leaders or
prophets would have become the two sisters. But some centuries later, when, perhaps,
this new sect would have become a State religion, the Free Thinkers would, have
found that this religion must have originated from old myths and would have proven
it. That would, in every case, have been easy, but not correct.
Religions are of
very different origins, inter alia:
1.) Some chieftain or a great robber or an emperor became a
god. Examples are well known and perhaps you know more than I.
2.) Myths are transformed into religions. That case happened
very frequently and Robertson, in "Pagan Christs" reports enough
examples.
3.) Some people get revelations, apparitions, heard voices,
began dancing and singing at unfit occasions and prophesied the end of the
world.
No. 3 happened frequently in the USA. Some decades ago, when the revivals
were more in fashion than today, such things happened several times a year.
When I was in New York, 1910 and 1911, there arose two new sects, the one
provided with much money. When the leader of one of the sects was prosecuted
for some swindle, his followers simply stated, that "Satan has attacked us
and much additional spiritual work and many sacrifices are needed."
Now, what is
reported in the last chapters of the Evangeles? Several women, among them Mary
of Magdala, who formerly was possessed of seven devils (Lukes, VIII, 2) and
whom no court in England or Germany would have admitted as a witness, had an
apparition at the grave of Jesus, heard an angel talk and talked to him. She
reported what she saw and heard to some disciples of Christ. These were men who
understood little of Christ's moral prescriptions but hoped that he would begin
a temporal sedition (Acts I, 6) and were, by this, also susceptible to
apparitions and revelations. They spoke to Christ, saw him disappear, heard, in
connection with that talk, two angels (Acts I, 10, 11) so that today such
people also would not be admitted as witnesses in any court. But all these
apparitions became the real foundation of Christianity. Saint Paul took the
reports of these apparitions as the most important part of the new religion.
(I. Corinthians XV, 19)
Whether the moral prescriptions of Christ were at that time
already known, is dubious, the Evangiles being written probably long after
Christ's death (but - - I think, not after the destruction of Jerusalem by
Titus. In the Evangiles several streets and spots of Jerusalem are mentioned,
as still existing, although they were certainly destroyed in the year 70 by the
Roman legions. Josephus reports that Jerusalem's destruction was quite complete
-- and that the town was deserted for long time. If the Evangiles had been written
after 70, the author would not have said the spots still are so called
but: they were so called.).
So I share the
standpoint of many Free Thinkers that the real foundations of Christianity - -
the historical - - have not been myths but apparitions, quite in the same way
as they still today in America, in Europe and in Asia religions come into
being. I agree with you, that if the emperor Constantine would not have made
Christianity his State religion, it
would long have disappeared, as most other religions of a similar origin have
disappeared. On the other hand, it may be true what many historians say: New
religions which introduced new and complicated ceremonies get a chance to live
long, and Christianity introduced many new ceremonies/
My opinion is that
the life of Jesus Christ, his doctrines and morals, should be considered quite
apart from historical Christianity. It may be, that in the reports of Jesus
Christ's life some myths were introduced, just as certainly as many fables were
introduced. But much of his life and, especially, the story of his death seems
to me to be true. If it would be invented, then the inventor would have
invented things more to the glory of their hero.
Although Jesus
Christ in general seems not to have been superstitious, in some details
he shared the superstition of his time.
1.) One of the
superstitious habits of the time was: not to pronounce words with a
"bad" meaning. If another had pronounced such words and demanded a
confirmation, one answered "thou sayest it", of which there are many
examples in the Evangiles. This superstition seems to have prevailed in all
antiquity. It is known that Greek commanders avoided to pronounce the word
"left" when they were at the head of troops. (Well drilled soldiers
might have perceived that as the command: "Turn left!" and would have
suddenly all turned to the left! - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
2.) Another superstition was that the scriptures contained a
secret sense beside their "normal" sense and that future events were
secretly announced in certain words of the holy scriptures. Such a secret sense
was also ascribed to passages whose sense was quite clear, such as II Moses,
XII, 46 and IV Moses, IX, 12 (… neither shall ye break a bone thereof. … nor break any bone of it and
Ev. St. John, 19, 36.) Jesus Christ believed that many of the passages of the
old books spoke - - the secret sense taken into consideration - - of him,
which, obviously, was an astonishing kind of superstition. (Rather:
Self-delusion? - J.Z.) No myth of antiquity offers an analogy to that
kind of superstition.
(Edgar Allan Poe reveals the manner in which many think, of
a secret sense in old scriptures, in his novel: "The Fall of the House of
Usher."
-----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath,
12.12.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
today no more than a acknowledgement of having received
numerous things by, your kindness, in
the last two weeks.
1.) your letters of 29.11. and 30.11., both received 2.12.,
together, although that of 29.11. was sent by Air-Mail.
2.) very much printed matter,
a.) those of Guy A.
Aldred,
I.) Socialism
and the pope,
II.) The rebel
and his disciples,
III.) Letters to
the editor,
IV.) Historical
and traditional Christianity,
V.) Studies in
Communism,
VI.) Pioneers of
Anti-Parliamentarism,
VII.) Dogmas
discarded, two parts,
VIII.) Bakunin,
IX. ) Socialism and
Parliament,
X.) The devil's
chaplain,
XI.) A call to
manhood,
XII.) Communism.
b.) those of the Duke of Bedford.
I.) Are
Britons mad?
II.) The
absurdity of the National Debt,
III.) The
Financiers' Little Game,
a) papers,
I.) City
Press, 28. 10., 11.11., 18.11.,
II.) National
News-Letter of 20.10.49.,
III.) Truth of
11.11. and 18.11.,
IV.) Economist of
19.11.
3.) A parcel with
coffee, sugar and tea in such a quantity that through the greatest intemperance
in all three - - which is in my nature -
- I certainly will have enough of it for the whole winter and a long time
after.
(Am I responsible for that intemperance?? Your theory,
Individualist, Dec. 1949, page 42. says: yes! But I prefer Kant's and
Schopenhauer's theories, which are more honourable for me and absolve me.)
4.) Individualist of
December 1949,
5.) A very
interesting clipping from the Times of 1.12.49. "Separatism in
Bavaria". The assertion of the Dr. Fischbacher: "A Bavarian who
marries a Prussian girl was committing "Blutschande" will give
abroad the impression that political unity is not the most urgent thing
in Germany. The impression is right.
(Personally I was always a Federalist in the sense in which Proudhon
used the word in his "Du principe fédératif.")
In my next letter I
hope to say something about the matters on which I could not write to you for
so long.
How can I thank
you??
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
20. 12. 1949. Your letter of 17.
12. 49, received today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the radio-lady, my neighbour in the chamber besides mine,
has received a visit and therefore stopped her radio. That gives me the
possibility to write to you some words. There are days where that lady takes
from me 5 hours or more. Though there are legal prescriptions, anyone in
Germany has practically the right to kill every thought in his vicinity by
radio (noise - J.Z.). I think, 9/10 of the people are of a mentality to use
this right. That the percentage in other nations is hardly less is a bad
consolation. (Why didn't he use ear-plugs? They can be rather effective! -
J.Z.) Radio is an invention like concentration camps and atomic bombs. The race
that invented them and uses them will one day be extinguished by nature
herself, like Ichthyosaurs and similar creatures were, which nature herself
must have considered as a blunder. You see, I do not esteem the Germans more
than other people, but perhaps you may have thought, that I did.
---------------------
I have to thank you
for much interesting printed matter.
Some days ago I received:
1.) The "Individualist, December-Issue. You mention me
4 times. I appreciate the honour, not to speak of the pleasure. I hope to write
to you about some details of that issue.
2.) The Scots Independent, December issue. If your article
does not completely change the monetary views of that party, then I do regret
the existence of that party.
The least of what an impartial reader must expect is that a
great number of people demand lectures from you about the Free Banking System.
What the Editor writes about the different injuries to Scotland by English
Banks, Financial Boards, etc. is not as
convincing as the author may think. Firstly, the details given by the editor
seem not of very great importance. Probably there are other details which lets
one expect that there are also channels by which money flows from England to
Scotland. To get a clear insight, one must have a good statistics, which in
such things is impossible.
A detailed plan how
to aid building in Scotland by Free Banking would win many people. A principle
of advertising experts is - - you know it - - "Detaillieren heisst
interessieren." - in German - - in English perhaps:
"Giving details arouses interest."
(The lady switched her radio on again.)
(Are excessively noisy people still ladies and gentlemen? -
J.Z., 2.6.03.)
3.) National News-Letter of 3.11.49. Interesting what Stephen
King-Hall reports of the views of Germans about the dismantling. You know that
I see these things from a very different point of view. The Russian army in the
East of the Elbe is for me the main factor. This army consists - -
conservatively estimated - - of about 2 1/2 million of men. If England and
America do not range the same number at the West of the Elbe, they do neglect a
fundamental military rule and achieve nothing than that their small army, now
occupying Western Germany, will be taken prisoner in a few hours, if the war
should break out. (Which does not depend of Stalin, but - - as the Chinese-
Japanese wars teach - - upon some generals, quite unknown before. The last war
was begun by the chief of the 19th
Chinese Army at Peking. Once the war has begun, no order of the central
government can stop it.)
If there are 2 1/2
million English and American Soldiers in the Western Zone, then, of course,
every misuse of factories is impossible, if the soldiers and their officers do
not sleep the whole day, the word taken quite literally. The best would even be
to open again the old ammunition factories, occupy them by English or American
workers and let them produce ammunition. Such a regulation would also be the
relatively best for Germany herself. If G. would be occupied by the Russians
(again that collective and misleading term for subjects of a tyrannical empire
that subjugated not only "the" Russian people - also very diverse,
but over 100 other ethnic groups, not to speak of all the other groups. - J.Z.,
13.2.03.) she would suffer the fate which Russia suffered herself for several
centuries after the Mongol invasions. ( I believe the effects of this invasion
are still to be felt, especially concerning the mentality of the people - -
yielding to every political pressure, if it is exercised with sufficient
cruelty.) (Not exactly a "Russian" characteristic only! There were
actually xyz uprisings against the Soviet regime. Alas, they were not
libertarian ones, guided by a genuine liberation program. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
4.) The Economist of 19.11.49.
5.) Truth of 11.11. & 18.11.49.
6.) City Press of 28.10., 11.11. & 18.11.
7.) National News-Letter of 20.10. & 1.12.49.
In the issue of 1.12. King-Hall states that something must
be done to militarily defend Germany.
(J.Z.: Rather, to secure it in a libertarian way. The mere
military one only leads to more massive mutual slaughters and loss of liberty
and wealth on all sides. It does not liberate anyone and does not even protect
conventional and limited liberties sufficiently. Compare the current
restrictions on freedom in the USA, even before the war against Iraq [rather
than a commando raid against Saddam Hussein], has begun. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
He is one of the few who sees the things. I do agree
with him, that it is, at the moment - - not so important that German soldiers
are accepted for the new Allied Army. But that the army itself is quickly
organised, that is important.
8.) Truth of 25.11. and 2.12.: Truth of 25.11. speaks
of "Israeli Nazis". Truth is
right. Z a n d e r wrote an excellent book about a peace between Arabs and
Israelis - - quite in vain of course - - Nationalism always wins in similar
situations. Nationalism can only be persuaded by brutal force, and one day
Israel will meet that force and become a little province of a mighty State - -
Persia, Russia, any other, and perhaps a new Babylonian Captivity will be
organised by the ruler of that State. There was only one good reason to
create that State Israel: Giving Free Banking a chance. Israel did not, but
imitated all monetary atrocities of the Western world. It has no moral right
any more to exist as a State.
(J.Z.: No territorial State has the right to exist as a
territorial State! Neither B. nor Z. did then and there try to establish an exterritorial
nationalism, one that would at the same time have provided full exterritorial
autonomy for all racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, ideological
communities of volunteers, which would have made their peaceful coexistence
possible and would have tended to rapidly advance all of them, in peaceful
competition with each other. In my one talk with Zander, he asserted that B.
had neglected the "community" aspects of human beings. Certainly,
sometimes, in letters like this one, he did. But in others he stressed the
voluntary and personal law aspects, starting with individual secessionism and
voluntary associationism. But too often even B. slipped back into terms,
conditions and visions of territorialists only, who have "painted
themselves" - and all others - "into a corner" in the worst
possible way" and are not even away how they have done this and how they
could have avoided it. - Seeing the personal law traditions of Arabs, Jews and
Christians in that area, Israel could have re-established and expanded them -
and thus achieved peace and prosperity for all in that are. Elsewhere B. had
stated that he had no better expectations for Jews regarding monetary freedom
than for other people. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
Truth is an excellent paper. I hope to write more about it
in one of my next letters.
9.) City Press of 2.12.49.
S. W. Alexander reports on the agitation of a small group (the mass of
the people does not care about it) to restore the gold standard in that sense,
that government should promise to convert, upon demand, the circulating paper
money into gold coins.
All terrors of the redemption standard would be renewed. Old
Hegel was right when he said (he died in 1831.): "history teaches
nothing but that people do not learn anything from it."
The worst of the new gold-agitators is the professor Spahr
(always the professors); Rittershausen sent me some pamphlets of him.
10.) Economist of 3.12. 49.
Contains a very able critique of Schacht's new book. I bought the book.
Schacht does not conceive Free Banking and has not the least idea of it. The
cell in his brain are lacking, as in the brains of most contemporaries. I hope
to write still something about that book. That Schacht will "cover"
his new paper money by the gold buried in Fort Knox you have read. When Goethe,
in his Faust, let the devil Mephisto create a paper money "covered"
by still to be found gold treasures, in the empire, it was a good joke and it
is economically quite the same as Schacht's proposal.
11.) A new pamphlet by Drysdale, Supplement to "The
Malthusian", issue of November 1949.
If Malthus' contemporaries would have followed his suggestions, Stalin
could tomorrow occupy England (a little more than 10 millions) without having
to mobilise his (whole? - J.Z.) army.
-------------
12.) Mosley's "Union". A nazi would have used M.s
arguments. They are very stupid but -- for this very reason - - seductive. In
Germany we experienced that. I myself would not have believed, before 1933,
that the stupidity of arguments could be a political asset of such importance.
--------------
I hope to write
about much of the papers' content. At the moment the time is lacking.
--------------
I expect
"Liberty", with many thanks beforehand. I think that the issues of
"Liberty" belong to the most important events of the 19th
century. One day the issues will be collected and form a new kind of Bible,
which will find its commentaries and translators and produce real good
(benefits? services? advantages? - J.Z., 13.2.03.) which the Jewish + Christian
Bible - - here we fully agree - - certainly did not.
---------------
I also expect
"Individualist Anarchism", which I do not yet know.
---------------
Letter of
"News Values". Your question. Today the liberty of press is again
pretty great, and there are dozens of papers which would print a letter such as
that of Maj.-Gen. J. N. Slater. Also one must say that Germans, since about a
year - when the liberty of press was much increased - - use that
liberty. I am a subscriber of the Berlin Paper "Der Tagesspiegel",
which is pretty impartial. (Not enough to ever publish a letter to the editor
by B.!)
At the time, when the leaders of the Social Democratic Party
- - with few exceptions - - were ready to pass to the "Sozialistische
Einheits-Partei" (Socialist United Party), the Tagesspiegel, although by
no means a social- democratic paper, opened its columns to the then small
minority of the old Social-Democratic Party and so contributed much to create a
Social-Democratic Party on a new basis. Also the minority won time to create a
new daily of its own (very difficult at that period) and, in the interval it
was able to speak to its adherents. That a paper opened its columns to another
party, of which it was no friend (although not in very strong
opposition, either) is a rare thing, but it happened here, in Berlin.
In many papers I
find now proof of much independence of thought. That will still improve
further, if the supply of paper will improve. What I miss is the same what you
miss in England: Interest for questions of Free Banking.
Now practically every political standpoint can be expressed
in the press and I do think the ideas existing in the brains are
expressed excepted those of such outsiders as I am.
-----------------
Very interesting
Sir John Boyd-Orr's figures. It seems that this author completely changed his
views - - very honourable for him. My impression is: the real situation: How
to sell the victuals??? begins to become known. If the world's population does not increase very
quickly and very considerably, then it will be confronted by an agrarian crisis
no less evil than 70 years ago. Even Drysdale seems now to estimate the
possible maximum of the world's
population at 6,000 millions, a number which he quotes from Whitaker's
Almanac, 1940, page 226, obviously accepting it as a good estimate. (The optimum
population - - the word taken in the sense of Prof. Cannan - may be less than
6,000 millions. One must take into consideration that if the Earth's whole
present population - - about 2 1/4 thousand millions - - would be drowned in
the little Sea of Constance, this sea would increase its level for about a yard
and some inches only. Such a small quantity of living matter can easily be
nourished by the plants of the rest of the Earth and the fish in the oceans.
(J.Z.: I made once a similar comparison but did not check
its accuracy: If all the living substance of all people on earth were smeared
evenly and quite flat, as a film over all the land's surface, assuming it to be
flat, then this would be a very thin film indeed. We take the sheer biological
"mass" of all people far too serious and greatly over-estimate it.
Obviously, the total of all plants constitutes a much larger volume. Perhaps
someone will bother to calculate the approximate thickness of that
"film" now, for ca. 6,000 million people, excepting only Antarctica and
high mountain areas and lakes, rivers and housing blocks, road surfaces etc?
And maybe that person would also be so kind as to e-mail me his findings? An
estimate of the thickness of the "film" that could be provided by all
the other "bio-mass" on Earth, perhaps separately for land and sea,
might also be helpful as a comparison. Maybe such information is already
available on the Internet somewhere? - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
----------------
Lucas-Plan of
profit-sharing. I must confess that I am no friend of profit-sharing. Profit is
essentially a result of the employer's activity, has much to do with prices,
selling ability, etc., which is all quite outside the sphere of the workers.
Also the workers themselves do not like profit-sharing, and if the profit, 2
times distributed, lacks in the third year, they show distrust. A far better
system is to interest the workers in reducing management costs, as was
introduced at gasworks for decades. It is much more effective for workers and
saves great quantities of raw materials, tools and time. An acquaintance of
mine saw this system at a lithographic work-shop at Grenoble. An apprentice
dropped one of the great lithographic plates, which broke. The apprentice got
beaten, because in the work conditions it was stated that if the expense for
these plates exceeded a certain amount, then they were to be covered by the
workers. The difference of this amount and the real expense for the plates was
paid to the workers, if less. The old Prussian railway administration had a similar
system. There was a certain amount of coal fixed for each ton-kilometre. If the
engine-driver burnt less, he got a percentage. At the same time, he got a
premium for punctual arrival - The system worked well. In all these cases the
avoidance of unnecessary costs is quite in the sphere of the workers.
Another thing is
creating factory savings banks. A pound applied in a factory may well produce
15 % as in the example of Lucas. If it would not be so, the factory could not
pay for industrial loans, granted by banks, 6 % p. a. and more. If the factory pays to workers, who
save with the factory, the amount really produced, it is an advantage for both
- - greater for the workers than for the employer. 10 pounds a year, saved for
a period of 30 years, interest 15 % p.a., produces exactly 5,000 pounds, a
number, which I take from Spitzer's Compound Interest Tables. Saving with the
factory is so far better than "Social Insurance", that it would be
violently demanded by the workers it they would know its possibilities. The
savings could be protected by the factory against a devaluation. Social
Insurance funds cannot. (At least in Germany it was not seriously tried to
introduce value-preserving clauses for their investments.
"Investments" in the State's "insecurities" goes on an on!
- J.Z., 13.2.03.) It seems: Lucas made a good start. This beginning could
easily be improved. He wants an adviser like old Rowntree has been.
(Factory Savings Banks, outlawed in Germany from about 1927,
if my memory does not deceive me, upon the insistence of the bank lobby, would
not only offer old age savings and security advantages. After some years,
certainly after some decades, the workers could transform their saving deposits
there into shares in their firm or could become majority shareholders or
cooperative owners of their firm. Another natural development that was legally
blocked although it could have ended the anti-industrial warfare between
employers and employees. I suppose the legal situation in other countries does
not favour such savings opportunities, either, seeing that in most countries
the existing savings banks have privileged positions, i.e., are protected from
competition, which today, in Australia, permits them to pay sometimes
ridiculously low interest rates while charging their debtors high ones. - Under
government and union management, I fear that the present firm by firm
super-annuation fund arrangements, always subject to more and more legal
intervention and taxation, will not develop in this direction. - What is right,
economically possible and desirable - is all too often outlawed or
over-regulated and thus more or less destroyed. J.Z., 13.2.03.)
----------------
My impression of
the Aldred pamphlets is now no longer as good as it was at first.
Nevertheless, the pamphlets are psychologically very interesting. They prove
that these people have no program, which is a serious thing. It leads to
Sovietism in times of revolution. (Example: Kropotkin, who believed himself to
be an anarchist and at the end of life agreed with the Soviets.)
(J.Z.: While he moved to Russia, in his last years (before
the Soviets had engaged in their counter-revolution!) -according to other
informants, he was soon disappointed by the Soviet regime but had no longer an
opportunity or the strength to protest. He might even have died prematurely,
due to cold and hunger. 9.12.1842 - 8.2.1921. My old Encyclopaedia Britannica,
1959 edition, says: "He arrived in June 1917 and settled near Moscow,
taking no part in politics." Certainly, he did not enjoy freedom of speech
and press then and there. - I would doubt anything which the Soviets might have
ascribed to him as having said in favour of their regime. - However, his
economics was as weak as that of the Soviets. - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
---------------
Christianity, Dying ??? Things which are as foolish do not
die. Economics attracts you more - - well - - Proudhon says:
"L'économie politique c'est la métaphysique en action. If Proudhon is
right - - and I think he is - - then the two things are in the same sphere - -
one reason more to turn from Christianity to economics, the latter containing -
- perhaps - - what is valuable in the first.
----------------
My condolences
that you must drink dandelion-tea! God - - if he exists - - may preserve
me!!! But the physician of Frederic, called the Great (he introduced Banking
into Prussia, but not Free Banking) was convinced of dandelion tea and promised
the king restoration of his health it he would use it. Zimmermann - - the
physician - - was considered as the greatest physician of his time.
I accept your recommendation to drink my (your) coffee and
tea without further reference to Kant or to Schopenhauer. From Kant in reported
that he would not drink coffee, because he believed it to be unwholesome. But
when he smelled coffee, he could hardly resist. If he would have drunk his
coffee every morning, he would - -
I am convinced - - have produced still many better things than he did. Voltaire
calculated, at about 70, that he had drunk 80,000 cups of coffee. Probably, he
would not have been able to fight as long, and at last victorious, against the
practice of torture, if he hand not drunk the 80,000 cups. My Christmas will be
- - thanks to your contributions - - riotous enough.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
21.12.1949. Your letter of 30.11.49.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I cannot agree that
we differ essentially concerning the application of the principle
"value by acceptance" to
external trade.
We both think, that the principle should not be prohibited
and do think, too, that complete and absolute liberty of trade is the right
judge to decide the question: Does the principle offer considerable advantages
or not?
If it should be possible to overcome the psychological
difficulties (whose existence I do admit) - - economic difficulties are less
than under the system of 1913.
---------------
From "The
Statesman's Yearbook", edition 1931, page 64, I take these figures:
Notes issued:
L 169 606 000
in 1926,
171 218 000 27,
413 784 000 28,
405 848 000 29,
407 000 000 30.
Besides the notes
circulated other currency whose amount I cannot state from my
statistics.
In 1914 circulated
notes, for L 36 139 000 and a considerable amount of other currency. (German
Statistical Yearbook of 1919.)
My impression is
that the value of the currency before the devaluation of 1931, expressed in
ounces of fine gold, was very much greater than in 1914, and that the
difference was great enough to expect: Anything may happen with the currency.
If the amount of paper currency per capita + amount of other currency per
capita, surpass a certain "normal" amount, expressed in ounces of
fine gold, always something happens to reduce the amount to its
"normal" value, in most cases a devaluation in some form.
The
"normal" relation between gold and paper-money is - - I think
- - always stated by a really free market, the latter word taken in the
sense, in which Adam Smith used it.
There exists also a
"normal" relation between the population and its needs for means of
payment, and the available quantity of means of payment, both stated in weight
of precious metal - - gold in modern times and silver in old times, for the
first time scientifically investigated by Petty.
An approximate numerical ratio is the observed ratio
in those times, which can be taken for "normal". The normal ratio
varies a little from time to time but not very much, so that - - I think
- - Petty's estimates still are of practical value.
The true state of
currency is hidden by cours forcé of paper money. An important part of the
cours-forcé-state is also the prescription to price all goods, wages,
rents, etc. in terms of paper currency. In England this prescription exists
since 1914. This prescription is the technical presupposition of inflation.
Without cours forcé inflation is technically impossible. That truth was
self-evident for the elder theory. Ricardo, in his celebrated Bullion
Report, was the first economist who did not see that truth, treated notes with
cours forcé and without on the same footing and by this error spoke that
nonsense which he reproached, in the Report, his adversaries for, who - - as
may still be learnt from this very
Report - -, were quite well instructed and judicious people. But for many decades
after Ricardo the truth was not forgotten - - for instance by the German
Banking Law, created after the war of 1870/71.
In Germany, to all 25 governments, it was prohibited to
create a paper money with cours forcé. It was considered as the principal means
to prevent inflation. (The author of the German Law - - a great progress for
its time - - was Michaelis.)
In Germany Prof.
Rittershausen was the first who, after the war, remembered the old, truth and
still today seems to be the sole economist who defends and understands it.
------------------
From a
communication in the Berlin "Tagesspiegel" I learn that the English
government demands from Canada that exports from Canada to England
shall, in future, be paid in pounds, not in Canadian Dollars, and that
Canada agreed. I do hope that it will be the first swallow that makes the
summer.
The necessity to
avoid unemployment by exports is, at the present monetary structure of
the world, the
greatest of all necessities, for all countries, and if one
Government reflects for a moment about this necessity and finds out other means
than export, to employ its own people, at least for some months, then this
government can get all commodities of the world for its own currency. The
others must agree, for the unemployment-menace overwhelms all contrary
arguments.
-----------------
If in your letter
of 17.12. you would not have expressed your wish to stop discussing
Christianity, I would tell you, that your argument: "But most of the
miracles related in the Gospels give similar details." - much impressed
me, so that I reduced the probability of Christ having been a real man to less
than 99%. I was not yet able to attain the optimal point (10 % seems to me to
be too small) corresponding to our knowledge drawn from the Gospels, a passage
from Tacitus, another from Josephus (perhaps falsified by pious Christians,
pressed as I by arguments such as yours), etc.
-----------------
The Duke of
Bedford, as an economist, is not a 100 % author.
I agree with you that the State should create means of
payment (sans cours forcé - - I add), enough so that its subjects are able to
pay their taxes. Steuart said many and good things about this point.
The Four Bills treat the emission of State Paper
Money without cours forcé. But experience shows, that if governments issue
paper money for any other purpose than getting taxes, they do misuse it, issue
too much, cause a depreciation and then introduce the cours forcé, the real
root of all evils.
The best theory
about the point is given by Zander in his pamphlet about railway money.
If a State has to
finance a war, it is a far lesser evil if it raises loans of the usual type
than to issue additional paper money
with cours forcé for the amount of the cost of the war.
-----------------
The Duke mentions
the "Jehovah's Witnesses" and their persecutions in Greece, being
suspected of Communist sympathies. I enclose a clipping from the
"Tagesspiegel", which proves that they are persecuted by the
Communists in the Eastern Zone of Germany too.
--------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed U. v.
Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
22.12.1949. Your letter of 29.11.49.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
the problem of the
pound-spending tourists may seem to be of secondary importance but it is
connected to problems of the first order. Economists should treat the problem
so as the former German Reichsgericht dealt, sometimes, with matters seemingly
unimportant - - say, dealing with no more than a few hundred Marks - - with the
greatest erudition and at length. The judgements were in some of the cases more
pamphlets than simple conclusions. But the Reichsgericht knew what it did. The
legal principles of the cases were interesting and had not come under
consideration before. So once I read a judgement in the case of a liability
insurance, where it was to investigate what was the real cause of the event
that produced the liability.
The VII. Senate quoted all what John Stuart Mill had
said about cause and effect, quoted David Hume and many other philosophers, and
all authors here to be quoted, so that the judgement became an interesting
philosophical book, where the old distinction between causa efficiens and causa
occasionalis was justified and is was also investigated, whether circumstances
of an event could also be considered as causes or merely as parts of them.
We agree completely
that if the governments would free the foreign exchanges then our problem would
not arise. Only after artificially shortening the supply of foreign currency
does the problem seem to be important.
I.) Should a simple citizen have the right to decide for
what purpose currency can be used in buying abroad?
II.) Should this citizen have the right to decide whether a
payment should be performed in foreign currency or in the domestic one?
III.) Should the citizen decide the rank of importance of
bought goods?
The prevailing
statist mentality, by which 9/10 of the people is possessed, says: No and
never! The decisions may come to be made by the greatest blockhead in
office, rather than by a Socrates not in office.
---------------
A further
investigation - - that is my opinion - - will arrive at the result that
external and domestic trade should be performed with the help of a currency
which will not be hoarded and which is always available. Such a currency are
"Milhaud-Bonds", about which I wrote sometimes. Such bonds are
suitable to meet difficulties, which remain even after foreign currencies are
freed. A difficulty of that kind was, in old times, an economic condition in
which a country had spent all its gold for foreign goods but had still needed
more foreign goods. In old times merchants simply granted a credit until their
debtors had found fresh money. It was a possible way out of the difficulty but
it was not the best.
----------------
Love and
children. Here we agree fully. Jesus Christ himself had been a bastard
(Matthew I, 19), but his mother was a
well to-do girl - - probably of excellent qualities, who found a husband in
spite of her boy - - as it still happens today for wealthy girls that get a
child. That Mary possessed real estate at or near Jerusalem, I conclude from
the fact that she went there when the governor of Syria had imposed a new tax
on the property of Jews. She went to Jerusalem to make the tax return
personally. The verse Matth. 21, 3, where it is said:
"Go to the
village over against you, and straightway you shall find an ass, etc."
Christ would not
have disposed so freely of the ass, if he would not have known the proprietor,
and would not have had some authority over him. The thing is quite comprehensible
if one supposes that the proprietor was a tenant of Mary. (I am inclined to
ascribe a probability of about 60 % to that theory. Theologians - - of course -
- never will admit it. Historians did not yet. They should take it into
consideration. (There are still more items which make it probable that Mary
possessed some wealth. The education she gave to her son was very good. He
learnt all what a theologian of his time had to learn, although his birth
closed this career to him.) (So he made his own, as a prophet! - J.Z.,
13.2.03.)
----------------
Machiavelli's
opinion of aggressors. You are right: An
irresistible army of the UN can become the most effective engine of
tyranny the world has ever seen. I see only two ways out:
1.) The way which Fichte explained in his
considerations about the French Revolution, printed 1793. Fichte demanded that
a man should have the right to ignore the State and to cancel all relations to
it. The persons who gave up their citizenship
should have the right to form unions on a personal basis, like the old orders
of knights. The problem would then be to
settle quarrels between these unions, for which, perhaps, a second world
government must be created. (To write a book about the problems would be a nice
task.) (Individual secessionism. - J.Z.)
2.) Form an aristocracy like the old Roman. From Montesquieu
I learnt that there was an old Roman law, like that, which was incorporated
into the French Constitution of 1793 (Par. 27):
"Que tout
individu qui usurperait las souverainté soit à l'instant mis à mort par les
hommes libres."
(That every
individual who usurps sovereignty shall immediately be put to death by the free
men. - J.Z.)
Thus Caesar really was not murdered but legally
executed.
Schopenhauer asserts
(B. usually used "pretends" instead of "asserts". - J.Z.)
that love would come to participate, in a much higher degree than now,
in generating men. Thus there would arise an aristocracy, which would be as
difficult to tyrannise as a lion, with sticks or even scourges. That lion
tamers do use scourges proves nothing.
-----------------
Free, Banking will
help mankind to unite in marriages for no other motives than love and will, insofar
also check tyranny.
Further: Tyranny is
very difficult where there exists no exclusive currency, and
taxes are paid with the
help of Free Banks. Also Tyranny must be financed,
and if the tyrant does not have a note-printing press at his disposal, that
supplies him with fiat money, nor a gold treasure (as old tyrants did), then he
must stop his tyranny. The new religion, whose coming I expect, will fill its
adherents with a horror (fear of and anger? - J.Z.) against fiat money
(paper money) (with legal tender - J.Z.) such as an old Jew felt at the thought
that a swine could enter the temple.
-----------------
Social Statics. Soldiers, who left the ranks of an army such
as Hitler's army was, can be watched after they came over to the other
side. That is no problem. If the Russians
in 1914 and 1915 would have been so anxious, the Czech regiments
would never have left the imperial Austrian Army. But the Russians treated the
matter on a large scale and the success justified them. The Russians found ways
and means to grant the Czech soldiers all freedom and, nevertheless to watch
them. The details are reported in some historical works about the first world
war.
(J.Z.: I remember vaguely reports that years afterwards,
when the Russian Revolution had turned sour, or, rather, the Soviets had
organized their totalitarian counter-revolution, these Czech soldiers fought
their way home, to relative freedom, all across the length of Russia. The story
of armed forces thus deciding for themselves, twice, on who was their real
enemy and acting upon this, should be reported better than it was so far, to my
knowledge. Are there Czech writings, in translations, which supply the full
story? - J.Z., 13.2.03.)
--------------
Do you still
doubt that the Soviets possess the secret of Atomic bombs?????
--------------
Expression: Banking.
Will you continue to use the expression in the next edition of your book?
Christianity. (And money reform. J.Z.) The emperor Constantine performed one
good thing: his monetary reform. Before C. the Roman money unit was a nominal
unit, the Sesterz, whose silver or gold
value was from time to time prescribed by the Caesars. Consequently,
devaluations were very frequent. C. abandoned this system (now introduced in
the whole world, Tibet, as it seems, excepted) and introduced an honest weight
standard. By this he renounced to the old Caesar's right to debase the money
unit. In some countries the reform was preserved for centuries and in England
au fond still 1914. I think the people spoke thus:
The religion of an emperor, who introduces such
valuable reforms, must be good, although it is hard to understand. But the
whole money question is hard to understand. Certain is only: The old gods did
not prevent our Caesars from abusing their monetary powers. The newly invented
one seems to demand monetary honesty. Let us, provisionally, accept the
emperor's religion.
There in really a
subterranean connection between the ideal money system and the best philosophy or
- - the difference is not great - - religion.
The weight standard
is now prohibited in all countries, excepted - - as it seems - - in Tibet. In
the year 1922 the Germans began a monetary revolution against their inflation
money, introduced the gold weight standard in many, economic spheres and in
November 1923 this revolution had become so strong that Reichsbank and
government had to cede. The revolution was restricted to the middle classes,
but in October 1923 the workers began to revolt, too. Some leaders, so Tornow,
the leader of the workers occupied in wood industries, demanded "gold
wages", that is, wages paid in paper but fixed in gold value. Some years
later all that was forgotten.
-----------------
Cooperative
Wholesale Society. Workers must come to see that a fixed wage, as has been
in use for centuries now, became economically impossible. Now workers must
learn how to calculate like peasants, who also must be content with a variable
income. The only way to introduce such a state of affairs is the cooporative
organisation. Piece work, long introduced in shops, factories, etc. prevents
the exploitation of energetic workers by lazy ones. In Russia the artjel
is an old national institution and is not yet quite suppressed by the Kolchos
and the Sovchos-System. In Balkan countries the artjel is quite common. Serbs
are skilled road builders and many thousands of them were employed in Germany
for road construction. Very frequently they organised an artjel, choose a
leader and a cook and built a number of
kilometres of road for a contracted price. When I worked at Muehlheim,
at Thyssen's Iron Foundry (as a worker) in 1919, I met an old worker, who told
me many interesting details about the cooperatives of Serbian workers. He said:
Serbians are sociable people. For them a cooperative is a quite natural thing.
Germans want a master or employer. I say with Schopenhauer: "Time
is the possibility of observing different qualities on the same object. - That applies also to the Germany economic
mentality.
--------------
Aldred. If you will him my two letters about his
activities, I will be glad. The more I read his pamphlets, the more I share
your opinion about A.
--------------
Jews. Races come into being and fade away. Many of
the now living Jews are - - I think - - no real Jews any more but Europeans,
just like many Germans. Historians, too, do often overlook that being subjected
to a common ruler lets arise in the subjects the idea of belonging to the same
race. The subjects of the rascal David and his successors at last
believed themselves to be of a uniform race, although they were not, if the
Bible reports the truth, as I think it does in this case. The present German
race came into being after the thirty years war. Then Germany's population was
reduced from 25 millions in 1618 to 5 millions in 1648. Men were so rare, that
two districts of the: old empire permitted bigamy for 10 years after the war.
The dismissed soldiers, Scots, Irish, Spaniards, Flemings, Gypsies and also many Jews, propagated the
race, few provinces excepted. The children - - of course - - learnt German from
the mothers and not Croatic or Irish from the fathers. But the new mixture was
not worse than the old (although not much better) as history has proven.
Nietzsche, who said
also good things, said: "Not where you come from, but where you are
going to, decides what you are
worth". ("Nicht woher du kommst, sondern wohin du gehst, bestimmt
deinen Wert.")
Trust as a
basis in economics and politics. Madame Roland said and repeated in her memoirs
(very interesting, burnt): Distrust is the basis of liberty, a word
which was in common use during the whole French Revolution. Madam Roland
exaggerated, but - - au fond - - was in the right. Certainly, the trust
in the honesty and the moderation of the Comité du Salut Public did cost many
of the best French their lives. But trust as well as distrust are so general
terms, that they are of no use without detailed examples.
In the note- issuing business there is to be distinguished:
a.) trust in the issuer's honesty, the latter word taken in
its popular sense,
b.) trust into the issuer's ability, the latter word taken
in its popular sense,
c.) trust into the issuer's ability to distinguish a
mortgage from a bill of exchange - - the
latter ability considered to
be most essential
by the best German authors. The tendency of the public to deceive bankers by
presenting a bill
of exchange,
although really a mortgage is wanted, is quite general.
d.) trust into the issuer's ability to meet a run in a way
so that his customers do not say: Never
again this banker!!!
A good expert will enumerate more kinds of trust, necessary
in the business of note-issues.
A very deplorable
example of trust, where utmost distrust would have been justified, was
the trust of the (too many - J.Z., 14.2.03.) Germans into Hitler's promises.
Another kind of this trust is that of the (too many - J.Z.) English into
the political and economic abilities of the Labour Party, which cost England
her rank among the nations, and cost her many other things, which you know
better than I do.
(J.Z.: Its ability would have been great enough or
instructive enough - if it had been confined to directing the affairs of the
own members and voters only, leaving all others free to do their things
to and for themselves. Major problems arise only once one attempts to direct
the affairs of others, who did not volunteer, and this at their expense and
risk, while eliminating voluntary and competitive other options, under full
exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Presently ALL parties have that very
fundamental flaw, which induces them to commit many wrongs, while feeling very
righteous about them. See my ON PANARCHY series and www.panarchy.org and www.panarchism.info The secessionist option constitutes the most
important voting right and popularity poll assessment. Hitler's popularity
rating and membership would have rapidly dropped as soon as people became aware
of what he really stood for. Moreover, then he could only have tyrannised his
then relatively few remaining members. Then, all other Germans etc. could have
complacently watched his antics, as they would watch circus performances of
clowns, trained animals etc. He could have served as a deterrent and
enlightening example on what not to do. Territorialism gives the Hitlers,
Lenins, Stalins, Maos - etc., their best chance, everywhere, and deprives their
victims of their chances, everywhere and all the time! - PIOT, J.Z., 14.2.03.)
The ideal would be
an organisation in all spheres similar to that of a Tucker Bank, which confines
itself to short-term loans or secures itself by option clauses corresponding to
its long-term loans. Then a quite sudden turn from 100 % trust to absolute
distrust, within an hour, does no harm and has no other consequences than to
bring the goods of the debtors into the hands of buyers with the same
speediness as trust had changed into distrust.
-------------------
"… It would be six times as long. … " you
say.
Make some articles out of the pages you could not write to
me. Your friends will be very glad. You could not do better.
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
23.12.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
if my English would be better, I would write to Guy A. Aldred
and ask him what an Anarchist should do, if - - as in the case of
Alberta the government introduces such a tyrannical and idiotic money system as
that of Douglas. Will Aldred grant anarchists the right to refuse the
Douglas-Money, not accepting it in any payment and, on the other hand - - ça va
sans dire - - renounce all advantages promised (the promises cannot be
kept) by the government?
If Aldred grants to his adherents the right to decline the
Alberta-Money, then the Duke of Bedford will, perhaps, cancel his relations to Aldred, if not: then
Aldred is not a true Anarchist.
Certainly, neither Aldred nor the Duke ever meditated seriously
the problem of Cours Forcé.
(What would be a good English translation??????" (Alas,
this is the best that I can offer! - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
-----------------
(PANARCHISM - J.Z.)
In the year 1918 or
1945 the Allies would have imposed upon Germany and Austria (Or Bush
would do this now towards Iraq and North Korea, etc., as his peace aim! - J.Z.,
14.2.03.) the following law:
Every citizen has
the right to give up his citizenship and to become - - legally - - a foreigner,
to be legally considered as a subject of a neutral State or as a
"Staatenloser", that is, a man belonging to no State at all, and,
further: that the retired (secessionists - J.Z.) should be treated according to
the existing laws on foreigners (which were quite liberal) but that the
government should have no right to expel them, further: that the retired should
have the right to unite in such unions as they themselves think fit, and that
these unions shall have the right of jurisdiction
over the retired, if the retired transfer to them such a right, then the effect
would have been very considerable.
(Concerning the jurisdiction, I refer to Gibbons description
of the legal conditions in old German kingdoms, such
as the Franks etc. Every citizen had the right to choose a
legal union, whether it was the union which had accepted the Roman Law as its
guide, or another, which had, e.g., accepted the Franks Law, the Gothic, the
Alemannic, the Burgundian, etc. In cases of disputes between subjects, who
belonged to different unions, the law of that union was to be applied to which
the offender or the defendant belonged.
The above indicated idea, which was first expressed by Fichte,
in his "Betrachtungen ueber die Franzoesische Revolution", stood its
test by practice.
Such leagues, as
would at once have been created in 1918, would have been a considerable
obstacle for Hitler. In that year the hate against old imperialism was as great
as some years later nationalism was. Moments of that kind - - seldom in history
- - must be used by revolutionaries. They cannot be used if nothing is prepared,
as was the case in 1918.
(J.Z.: Alas, I cannot even reach the libertarians and
anarchists with such and related ideas, not even with the aid of the Internet!
Essentially, I can record them only on paper, in very few copies, in e-mails,
on microfiche, on floppy disks, and, one day, hopefully, also rather
comprehensively, on CD-ROMs and DVDs etc. Whether they will be notices and used
then and from such means, it not up to me. Even the minds of these radicals are
not yet sufficiently prepared for such ideas. - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
-----------------
The superstition,
that imports must be paid by foreign currency, could be used by taxpayers:
Suppose, that in
France, as well as in England a law would be demanded, by taxpayers, and
issued:
"All parts of incomes, which are used for paying
imports but without stressing the country's fund of foreign currency, are tax
free."
Then the following transaction would be possible: The Englishman
A. and the Frenchman B. barter - - say 1,000 pounds and an equivalent amount of
Francs. Then both present these "foreign" currencies to their
governments and demand to exchange the amounts for tax-free domestic
currencies. They may also proceed in this way, that the Englishman imports from
France and pays pounds and gets the amount for which he imported tax-free. That
supposes the consent of the Bank of England. (The Bank will not consent,
because by such a procedure its monopoly to finance foreign trading would be
broken.) The Frenchman may proceed in the same way and import from England to
France.
-------------------
In times of
unemployment the taxpayers could demand: Parts of income which - - if spent in
cash - - immediately produces employment,
are tax free. I think that this would be granted, if demanded.
-------------------
The present system
of supplying a country with currency, by a monopolistic issuing institute,
transforms the respective country into an organism which is in the same
centralist manner governed as it is financed.
Now all depends upon the chance: Is the ruler of the country
an able military leader, such as Napoleon or even Hitler. (Hitler's generals
now contest his military skill and say: We were the men, or, more
exactly spoken, every generals says: I was the man. But Hitler had a natural
faculty for butchering men and a future history will acknowledge it, as it acknowledge it for
Napoleon, although he was at last vanquished and committed many blunders.)
If Germany will get an able military leader, such as the
Prince Eugen or Gneisenau, the opponent of Napoleon, or Moltke, or Lossberg,
the commander of the Flemish armies in the Flanders Battles of the First World
War, a third world war will be unavoidable.
Should such a leader arise in France, he would, probably,
unite the German forces with his own, as Napoleon did and play the role of
Napoleon or Louis XIV. (In the "Mémoires de Saint Hélène" Napoleon
says, that the "Grande armées" of 1812 numbered more Germans than
French, and that, correspondingly, the losses were more on the side of the
Germans than on the French side.)
Free Banking would
create such an obstacle to such a development, that it should be also be
considered from a mere political and military standpoint.
"Experts" should also consider that the true
centre of the Soviet's military strength is their State Bank.
------------------
The
"Kapp-Putsh" of 1920 miscarried because the Reichsbank-President
Havenstein declined to join Kapp and gave him not one note. The whole plan was
based on the occupation of the Reichsbank and the Note-Printing-Department.
Kapp, although a financial expert, but only trained in long-term business and
understanding nothing of note-issuing, had not foreseen the possibility that
the Putsch-Army, some hours after the "Putsch" was without means of
payment, so that the shops would no more furnish victuals etc. The true story
of Havenstein's role - - a very honourable one - - is not yet written, but I
was told it by my former employer, the Dr. Ramin, manager of the Deutschland
Rückversicherungs A.G., whose actuary I was. Ramin and Kapp were
school-fellow's.
The political
position of a government, which possesses the note-press, is always strong.
That is an advantage - - considered from a historian's
standpoint - - if the government is no tyranny. It is a disadvantage if the
government is the contrary, as in the case of the Kremlin. A good government
may have all advantages of a centralised note-issuing institute by Free Banking
and some further advantages. A bad government can by overwhelmed if the
revolutionaries know how to finance themselves by Free Banking and its
principles.
Very,
faithfully Yours signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
24. 12. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
with the greatest joy I received today the LIBERTY - - 10 issues - - a greeting d'outre tombe - -
from our unforgettable Benjamin R. Tucker.
The way in which he printed the columns reminds me of old Greek
manuscript, of which I saw some specimens before the war, and one day - - we
hope - - also other people will look on the old sheets with that respect which
even average men feel vis-à-vis such an old manuscript. If the slogan at the
caption would not be so excellent, one could also say: "Tua res
agitur!"
By your kindness I
received also:
1.) The Economic Digest, December issue; I hope to write
still some words about this issue. It's extremely interesting.
2.) Truth of 9.12.49. (That "Truth" speaks on page
656 about annuities, as if there would not exist the danger of future
devaluations, displeased me.) An issue of "Truth" may be opened at
any page; it's always interesting.
3.) "The Economist" of 10.12.49.
4.) Six copies of your article in the "Word". I
will distribute them to my acquaintances and keep one for myself.
------------------
Flotsam in
"Truth" recommends pipe cleaners as a Christmas present for
up-to-date ladies. That reminds me of a little scene at station Westkreuz some
days ago. A woman of about 50 bought cigars at the little tobacco stand
on the platform. She spoke with a deep manly voice that could be heard at a
distance of 20 metres. She complained about the quality of the cigars she had
bought the day before and spoke so expertly about cigars and gave so many
details (I could hardly follow, being a non-smoker) that some dozen people around
her were much amused. Had she bought cigarettes, probably nobody would
have paid attention, but cigars - - a woman - - that seemed
interesting and aroused attention. Wherefore I concluded, that the sexes'
equality (in Berlin) is not yet complete.
------------------
On page 652 a Mr.
Howell said, in a letter to the editor:
"Sir, - I was disgusted to read in your journal of the
suggestion, that this country should make an alliance with that scourge of
Europe - Germany, whose people are probably still the greatest menace to world
peace. Etc.! (Mr. Howell recommends an alliance with France, "England's
old ally".
Although Mr.
Howell's reasons do not hold good in every respect, his feeling
is not unjustified. But: Every country with an absolute (centralised)
government is a danger to the world's peace and for a very simple reason.
(Now even as small and insignificant seeming ones as Iraq
and North Korea! - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
If the country is governed centralistically, then it depends
always only upon very few people whether the country will be at war or not.
Even it does not merely depend upon the supreme leader. It also depends - - as
the history in the Far East proves - - upon a few subordinate generals, who
simply begin a way, knowing very well, that once they have begun it, the
central government must follow at once, if it wants to or not. It seems
that e.g. the war of 1870/71 was begun less by Napoleon III, than by some
energetic persons of his court, although France certainly preferred
peace. But the government was centralised and France had no say in the matter.
If, in Germany, the
present centralised money system is continued, then the still prevailing
federalism will soon be replaced - - certainly in less than 10 years - - by
centralism, though the legal forms of federalism may be preserved.
Then Germany will be a country also as dangerous for the
world's peace as any other. - - (Mr. Howell does not speak of Russia.), not
because the people would be "the greatest menace to the world"
- - Mr. Howell should make a trip through Germany and hear the people -
- but by the centralised form of government/
On the other hand, Mr. Howell should remember, that
centralised governments never were and never can be reliable allies. Sympathies
of the peoples are quite unimportant in the external politics of
centralised countries. The government decides, and once the first shot is fired
- - it is always very easily to arrange that a first shot is fired - - the war
begins. Less than a dozen men, today and in the last centuries, decide and
decided on the world's
peace. Repeal of the centralised monetary systems (and their
replacement by free note issuing), is, in all countries, the first presupposition for talking
reasonable about peace.
(If that is true, then it becomes immediately obvious how
far we still are from having secured peace! - Naturally, there are other
aspects, too and B. pointed out many to most of them and I tried to combine
them in my two peace books: www.exterritorial.info/
- J.Z., 14.2.03.)
Let me add that perhaps
never before in the world's history, and also in Germany's history, was the
terror at the. outbreak of a war as great as 1939 in Germany. When the soldiers
departed, there was complete silence, except for the weeping of women and
children, who saw their husbands and fathers depart. The 10,000 men, roaring
the well known was songs at the "Deutschland Halle" (one of the
greatest in Europe, transmitted by radio, should deceive
no one. These men - - or more exactly spoken, about 9/10 of
them - - were commanded, and I knew several of them, who told me details
Not roaring with the mass meant for each of the 10,000 certain death at
a concentration camp. (Mr. Howell did not yet see what dictatorship means!!)
------------------
I know of only one
departure to the front which may be compared to that of 1939: That was the
depart of Hessian troops, sold to
the British government in its war with the American "rebels".
(Formally - - of course - - Hesse was allied with Great Britain.) Mr. Howell
may look for details in good English histories of that war.
------------------
In all
countries of the world - - Russia,
Germany, France and even England - - the true mentality of the people against a
third war is hidden by the centralised form of government. And this form is
unavoidable wherever there is a centralised administration of note issues - a
point of view, which is as true as it may be strange to men without training in
economics, like Mr. Howell.
(J.Z.: Compare Hayek's observations in his chapter: Why the
Worst Get to the Top, in "The Road to Serfdom", which, according to
him, applies to democratic regimes as well as to despotic ones. - I would add,
that many other factors are involved. The first may be territorialism [Free
Banking is just one instance of its exterritorial opposite,], another is
compulsory taxation. With that associated are government loans. Add to this
conscription, compulsory schooling, the statist mentality and practice and if you
want to review about 500 points on this matter, do at least quickly skim
through my two peace books. - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
---------------
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v.
Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
25.12.1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the Economist in its issue of 10. 12. 1949, page 1286,
speaks of the refugee's problem. The Economist is right in saying that
the problem is not confine to Germany but is an international problem. He
should have added that in India, very conservatively estimated, there are 15
million refugees, most of them in a still more miserable situation than the 7.5
millions now in Western Germany and the about 500 refugees who daily come in
from the Eastern Zone.
(J.Z.: How many see the main cause of this problem in the
territorialism practised everywhere? Not even these victims themselves, far
less the supposed "experts". - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
Engineers estimate
that an average worker in a factory is able to perform a daily work of about
100,000 kilogram-metres or 723,300 foot-pounds, not including the mental work
which is required for the most simple mechanical work and which no machine can
do. Physiologists say, that mental work also requires a certain quantity of
calories (1 cal = 3,088 foot pounds), which a man must get in form of victuals,
so that he may be able to perform it, and they do say, furthermore, that the
quantity of mental work performed by a worker, daily and in the average, nearly
equals the quantity of purely physical work, both expressed in labour units
(kilo-gram-metres or foot-pounds).
If the quantity of
labour, which the refugees are able to perform, would be at hand in the form of
a waterfall, then the use of this labour would not be a problem; on the
contrary: if the right to own and to use the waterfall would be in the least
doubtful, there would arise lawsuits and the interested parties would spend
much money to get the waterfall. But the labour offered by the refugees,
obviously much more valuable and of much greater use and application than the
simple work of a waterfall, is no object of demand. (Payable in legal tender!
Presently there are about 30 million refugees - and the illegal ones in
Australia are put on long terms into concentration camps! - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
Nobody will readily accept them (No government! Private
people are another matter! - J.Z., 14.2.03.) and very many refugees were sent
back to the Eastern Zone, where (for some at least - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
concentration camps and certain death, with the usual tortures, awaited them -
- a shame for humanity and, especially, for the
German authorities which, by such a behaviour, placed themselves at the
level of Nazi or Communist authorities. (Things are now better than they were
until some weeks ago and, especially in Berlin the refugees were treated with
less cruelty than - - say - - in Bavaria. I heard, three weeks ago, a high
official at a meeting of the Social Democratic Party say: Every refugee from
the Eastern Zone will be accepted in Berlin, if there is no evidence that he is
a criminal, who tries to escape his just punishment. May the economic situation
of Berlin workers become worse by the presence of so many refugees and the
necessary care for them. As long as the Berlin Workers are in a better position
than the refugees, the latter will get help and assistance. - The assembly applauded - - sincerely - -
and this applause was - - I think - - the best result of the
evening.)
(J.Z.: Not much later, refugees were denied permission to
work and look for accommodation in West Berlin and kept in refugee camps under
such conditions that very many of them preferred to go back into the Eastern
Zone. That was ascribed then to the "free market" conditions in West
Berlin, which, alas, shone largely by their absence. State socialism or State
capitalism was all too much at work in West Berlin, too, and unable to cope
with a flood of refugees. - J.Z.,
14.2.03.)
The true reason of
the infamous treatment of refugees in so many parts of the world and by so many
communities, which believe themselves to be civilised, and some also Christian,
is - - of course - - an economic dogma (Rather, anti-economic ideas,
beliefs, opinions, laws, regulations, practices and institutions. - J.Z.,
14.2.03.), believed now in the whole world, except by adherents of Freedom of
Note Issue, is the real cause of the refugees' situation.
This dogma is:
"The quantity
of employment possibilities is a limited one. The limit is given by the
quantity of means of payment in the community. The admission of other means of
payment than that granted by the Central Banks would be the greatest of all
evils and produce greater horrors than the starving of the unemployed."
(J.Z.: There is actually a kernel of truth in this, but once
combined with a completely false premise: If Free Banking would mean that
everybody would be free to issue legal tender notes, then everybody could cause
an inflation and an inflation by a single central bank is already bad enough.
However, Free Banking had never meant that but merely the free issue of
optional, refusable and discountable privately and cooperatively issued
currencies, none of which could cause an inflation, and all of which would
freely compete with each other and, thereby, reverse the popular version of
Gresham's law, so that the good monies would drive out the inferior ones, with
the latter being widely discounted or even altogether refused. - J.Z.,
14.2.03.)
Adherents of Free
Note Issuing say, on the contrary:
"Employment f
or a worker is given to the extent that the worker is physically able to works.
Supposed is merely, that there are no legal but senseless restrictions to
credit, the securing of credit and the issuing of notes without cours
forcé."
"In your book
you said what there is to say (Page 342):
"Yet,
theoretically, it would seem to be an unmixed blessing for a country to be
provided with labour by men who are willing to work for little return. The key
to the problem lies in the credit restrictions, which to-day prevent the due
utilisation of any fresh productive ability which appears."
Let me state, in
this connection, why labour offered by a waterfall is welcome and that of a
refugee is not:
The former can be utilised by credit given and secured in
the usual and well-known forms. To secure credit, given to employ refugees, other
forms are necessary, known only to those who are familiar with the ideas of
Free Banking and Free Note Issuing.
Let me add that
this matter also has a moral side. Before 1939 none of the refugees read
your book and very few were even interested in the problems you raise. But card
playing, football and little household affairs were what interested those, who
kept their homes and their opportunities to make a living. But such an
indifference is a kind of crime, and it may be that a future religion will say:
Among the many original sins of mankind, this indifference towards social
reforms and proposals to realise them, is one of the worst. (I remember that,
when I was young - -
long, long ago - -
many clergymen considered a serious interest, of average fidels, in
social problems, as a kind of distrust
in God's government of the world, and were inclined to consider such an
interest as a kind of sin. These clergymen were very guilty, although they, and
more than 99% of all others, would have considered such a reproach as a proof of insanity.
Let me further add, that Kant, the great philosopher,
in his ethical system, established as the first and most important duty of
every man to do what he can, in his sphere, for a reform of social conditions.
Even if he merely says, to his wife or to his children:
"The right of governments to declare war, is no right
at all but a presumption. We must do something against it", then he has
not lived in vain.
Even in the most tyrannically governed communities such a contribution
to social reform should not be impossible. On the other hand: At the Nazi-time,
the teachers were compelled to ask their pupils if they had heard talk between
their parents about "anti-national" subjects. If the teachers did not
denounce some victims, from time to time, they themselves were suspected of
having "sympathies with Hitler's enemies". Many parents were sent
into concentration camps upon information supplied by their children. (Often in
all innocence or with the best intentions on the side of the children. - J.Z.,
14.2.03.)
100 years ago the
refugee's problems would have been dealt with in a manner very different from
ours.
The first would have been, that all capital used to employ
the refugees would have been freed of taxes and the income from this capital
too. It was an old European tradition to meet conditions of distress in this
way: Attracting fresh capital by granting freedom of taxes. Thus was Germany
rebuilt after her great wars, for centuries. Still in the year 1848 the government
ordered for Berlin that capital, used to build new houses or to repair old
ones, would be free of taxes. The intention was to revive the building
industries.
If there would be,
in Germany, freedom of taxes, for American and other capital, then and at once,
it would become available in sufficient quantity. Factories to produce for the
needs of the refugees could be built, raw materials would also be available in
every wanted quantity. The market for the products would be provided by the
refugees' wants (practically unlimited) and could be secured by formal
commitments. But all that is legally impossible. Every immediate connection
between refugees and foreign owners of capital is severely prohibited, partly
by German laws and prescriptions and partly by laws and prescriptions of the
Allies. And freedom from taxes for all capital, creating employment for
refugees, was never earnestly demanded nor - - of course - - granted. The
refugees themselves are too helpless, ignorant and not enough economically
trained to demand it. Also, it is very doubtful whether any German paper would
dare to publish a demand so very different from all what governments,
professors, politicians, etc. had declared to be necessary.
Another obstacle
for foreign investors is the money standard prescribed for loans. Merely the
present "Deutsche Mark" is permitted, the same which has been
devalued some months ago. The people, who call themselves "the
industry", declared that the devaluation went not far enough and demanded
a sharper devaluation. Historical experience proves that such demands are
granted one day, in any country where paper money is privileged with a cours forcé'. There is, consequently, no
attraction for any judicious businessmen to invest money in long-term loans,
not for foreigners and not for Germans.
None of those
refugees, to whom I could talk, had ever cared about the here mentioned
obstacles (the list is by no
means complete). - I spoke to managers of banks, high officials,
exporters, scholars. None of them had ever occupied himself with the questions
which are here important. If they had done so, then there would have arisen an
informed public opinion about what is to be done. They would have demanded the
legal opportunity to import tax-free foreign capital, to agree upon gold
clauses or Dollar clauses, which one may trust and the removal of all
restrictions which now forbid so many people to work at all. Even if many of
these restrictions have been repealed during the last weeks: They have already
done what they were supposed to do: They isolated the refugees from Germany's
economic life and "protected" artisans, officials, etc. from
unwelcome "competition". That one refugee could also work for other
refugees and so be no competitor for residents - was not taken into
consideration and if one could have spoken of this possibility, one would have
been called a mere "theorist"
Now, for many refugees it is impossible to return to
productive work. The people became sick, some old, or simply forgot what they had learned, in a milieu far
worse than that of the poorest Negro at the Congo. (But terrorist groups always
welcome recruits from them with open arms! - J.Z., 14.2.03.) What I say here of
German refugees is in very many cases surpassed by the fate of refugees in
India, China and other countries.
If the principles
of financing unemployed labour, laid down in your book, would to better known
and would form a part of public opinion, then an economic problem of
refugees would never have arisen. The economic situation would have been
as you describe it in your book: All judicious people in the immigration
country would have been glad to accept workers who - - at least for a long time
- - were obviously ready to work under such conditions that a part of their work would be a present to the
communities with many immigrants. Western Germany, to give an example, would have appealed to the
workers in the East to leave their jobs there and to work in the West.
Free Trade would supply them with more food than they would
be able to eat, as Free Trade has always done.
Free note issuing would provide exactly the amount of means
of payment required to pay them.
Inflation would not be possible, when its primary technical
prerequisite, the cours forcé, would no longer exist.
The monopoly of the
Central Bank of Western Germany would be broken - - that's true. But the repeal
of that monopoly is the primary condition for Western Germany's recovery.
If the refugees
would have been sufficiently interested in economics and also instructed before
they became refugees, then they would also demand that, and the voice of so
many millions would, at last, be heard.
Still a hint to
novelists and story-writers, perhaps also for film-producers: Some of them are
in want of subjects. Let them come to Berlin and talk to the about 100 refugees
who come, day by day, from the East. He will hear stories which would be taken
as exaggerated if Edgar Allan Poe had written such things. The main reception
office is now in the Kantstrasse. Every policeman would guide him there.
For historians, as well, here is a nice opportunity. Current
history may be learnt at this office, not from books and not from papers, but
from those concerned.
Very
faithfully Yours - Signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
26.
12. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I am not certain whether you, for your religious
purposes, use the Christian calendar. I am afraid: you do not. Therefore,
I hardly dare to wish you a happy New Year in the usual
sense, but take it as a subsequent but very hearty wish for the current and the
following year of your calendar, which - - I assume - - begins with
Tucker's birthday or that of Proudhon. (Please, inform me.)
------------------
At that occasion:
There are published Banking Calendars. Why not create a Free Banking
Calendar????? Goethe says that Calendars are easy to be written.
"Es schnurrt mein
Tagebuch, (My diary is
busy (And nothing may be
harder
"Am
Bratenwender,
while I turn the roast
than to find readers -
"Nichts schreibt
sich leichter voll Nothing is
easier to fill for such a
compilation. - J.Z.)
"Als ein
Kalender."
than a calendar. - J.Z.)
(Anyone is invited to use the entries in e.g. this
correspondence or in www.butterbach.net/freebank.htm
for such a purpose, should he have difficulties in finding
entries for such a calendar. - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
You read so much. A
Free Barking Calendar would be the right place to deposit what has been valuable
of your readings.
It must not always be exactly Free Banking. All that is
reasonable, good and even what is beautiful - contributes indirectly to the
final victory of Free Banking.
(So, by all means, "loot" my "Slogans for
Liberty collection as well! - J.Z., 14.2.03.)
Free Banking is not
an aim, forgotten after being attained, it is a method to live, as a
revolutionary, as non-gregarious being, as a thinker who backs economy by
philosophy and philosophy - - as a life
- - by economy.
--------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 27.
12. 1949.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
you will have read in your papers that Otto Grotewohl's (the
Eastern Minister President) wife fled to the West. Grotewohl himself is sick
and carefully watched by the NKWD. A letter has been published by the Western
press, in which Grotewohl demanded from Schumacher, the Western leader of the Social-Democratic
Party, to be readmitted to that party,
whose leader he was until 1946. In this year he tried to carry over the whole
Social Democratic Party to the then founded SED (Sozialistische Einheits-Partei
Deutschlands), but the members in the Western Sectors of Berlin would not join
him. Grotewohl became, together with Pieck, the President of the new party and,
after the creation of the new Eastern Republic, he became its President, too,
again together with Piek.
I know Grotewohl
from his earlier speeches and writings and had also a little correspondence
with him in 1946. My impression was: The man is not 100 % bad. (Few men are
that.) For him there is a limit, and one day he will be arrested or
flee. And now the moment has come. May be that Grotewohl is already dead, but
that would not prevent
the world from receiving, still for some months or even years, letters
from him, telegrams of admiration for Stalin and pamphlets about the "question"
of an "Anschluss" of the Eastern Zone to Soviet-Russia. A trial will
be - - I think - - avoided.
What teaches the
case Grotewohl? It. teaches that very probably Kenneth de Courcy
is right when he
writes in the August issue of his "Intelligence
Digest" (page 2):
"On the
Atlantic side there has been far to little study of the weakness of Russia.
Secret political action by the Atlantic powers could get very near to blowing
up the whole Soviet System."
The leaders, are
all in a similar situation as Grotewohl is or was. If they could get a modest
existence in a country where men can live without the sword of Damocles over
them, they would go there. Many of the leaders preserved a remnant of human
feelings. But with such feelings one cannot live under the Soviets.
What is to be said of
the leaders is true for many soldiers. Daily dozens of deserters pass the
frontier, sometimes officers from the top. For every soldier, who deserts, one
may count hundreds or more, who would desert if they could and if they knew
their families to be safe. And for every leader who deserts or tries to,
there are several other leaders, who
would also like to try it if they could.
In such a situation
it would be an excellent offer to treat every Russian or German, serving now in
the Soviet Army, as a neutral foreigner, if he comes to the lines of the Allied
and declares, that his participation in the regime or its war was extorted. Let
me remind you that Mao Tse Tung uses this system on the largest scale against
the Kuo Ming Tang. The troops that come to him are, certainly, for the greatest
part, no Communists nor do they sympathise with communism. And yet Mao
discharges them, if they come to him, and sends them to the town or village
where they came from. By this system (In old times used by the king Wen, as
Kong Fu Tse reports in the Lün Yü) Mao wins victories which he never would have
won by ordinary military methods.
The offer must be made before the war begins and
daily communicated by British broadcasts. Every Russian soldier must know it. Some fanatics will
try to misuse the Allied's liberality. Never mind: Mao is in the same situation and knows how to
neutralise such people. His methods should be studied. In the case of England
the fanatics of the other side are no more dangerous than the pro-communist
people in England, whose number I estimate to much more than 100,000. It will
be possible to manage them.
The first station of Russian Soldiers, who came to the
English side, should be the Isle of Man. There is room for many and their
liberty could be unlimited. From' Man they might be transported to Senegambia.
There they can do no harm, can earn much money, can produce victuals as much as
they are able to eat (Russians eat much.), and may even get women from
the Negroes. The latter's manners permit temporary marriages. Do not
underestimate the women-question.
Humanity and
honesty need not be - - as average politicians believe - - political
impediments. Used in the right way, they become the best assets in the business
of politics.
-----------------
The Soviets are now
in the situation of the Jacobins (Jacobeans? - J.Z.) in the year 1794. In the
month of July (Thermidor) the number of killed and imprisoned people was so
great that hardly one family in France was not concerned. Moreover, every
leader had good reasons to fear the competition of others and did not know,
whether he would not be arrested in the night. Most of them slept every night
in another place. That was the right moment for Taillen and his fellows,
energetic and clever men. In Russia the number of people in the concentration
camps is estimated at 15 millions. Also, in Russia now, nearly all families are
personally concerned.
Let it be published
that the "Union for English-Russian Friendship" (which should be
created) pays for every atomic bomb the price the bearer demands, may it be in
gold, in other goods, in real estate or other advantages that he may determine
himself.
------------------
The English
government will do nothing. But private associations should prepare what there
is to be prepared.
------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
6. I. 1950. Your letter of 3. I.
50, received yesterday
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
If I were able to develop my pigeon-English to real English,
it would become clear that we agree in all that is essential.
(J.Z.: Yes regarding freedom of expression and freedom to
experiment, the free market and interest. No regarding details of sound
"free banking", gold standard, Free Trade, Panarchism, defence,
liberation, rights, duties, population, cooperatives, land reform, etc. There
are numerous differences even between individualist anarchists. - J.Z.,
24.5.03.)
I am very glad and
appreciate the honour to get some of my modest reflections published in one of
the next issues of the "Individualist", perhaps already in the February-issue.
(In that tiny journal, too, they remained nearly invisible
and inaccessible to most people. After many decades, I have still not got all
the issues under M.'s editorship. Perhaps no one has. But then I did not yet
follow up M.'s hint that the Australian National Library had bought a set. -
J.Z., 24.5.03.)
-------------
A German
"Individualist"?? To issue my own periodical and not being dependent
upon ignorant and timid editors has been my ideal for about 50 years.
Two or three times in my life I was tempted to end it and
David Hume, in his essay on suicide, gives the reasons which justify it for
cases like mine. But the (vain) hope to create or to discover a possibility to
publish my own periodical prevented me.
In December 1932 nearly all preparations were ready. But in
January 1933 came the Nazis, and if I would have published even one
issue only, they would have sent me to a concentration camp, as they did with
all liberal and socialist editors. Now I am old, without any connections, except
a little correspondence with a few friends, most of them in the same economic
situation as I.
---------------
Princess Elizabeth.
When the Germans still had an emperor, they considered all matters of the
imperial family as of the greatest importance and highest interest. Such
information, as the safe arrival of the heir to the throne at Malta, would have
been placed at the top of the issue by most of the monarchist papers (more than
50% of all). If the editor would not have done this, then the editor would have
got letters like that of J. N. Slater. The same is mutatis mutandis true of the
little princes (21), such as the Prince of Lippe, the Grand-Duke of Weimar,
etc. Their subjects were very much interested in their family affairs, and
these affairs were the inexhaustible topic of gossip in restaurants and
housewives. Even stories of the dogs and the cats in the Princes' and Dukes'
households were read with general sympathy, women of Liberals and Socialists
not excluded. If the princes were more than average, such as the Duke of
Brunswick or the Grand-Duke of Hesse (both really excellent men, the latter a
reformer of the
German industrial art), the veneration became a really religious one.
Perhaps the
advantage of such a mentality is greater than the disadvantage. The talk about
the princes and their wives and children led many people away from the affairs
of their own little households and gave them a notion that there are more
important things in the world than torn stockings and what neighbours cooked
yesterday.
Now this diversion of the past generation no longer exists
and some assert that, in consequence, the people grow more blocked every day.
Certain is:
Parliamentary despotism is, in the whole world, a greater obstacle to Free
Banking than were Emperors, Dukes and Princes.
One must consider,
that average people conceive notions like "cause",
"effect", "conditions", etc. only if these notions are
connected with persons. And in this connection many do conceive
the notion. Example: In Prussia and in some other German States the people
would have considered the introduction of a paper money with cours forcé not as
a violation of the rights of man and citizens, of which they had no clear
understanding, but as a dishonsty of the prince, and the prince knew that.
-----------------
Russian Atomic
Bombs. I am convinced: They do have them. But they would sell
them (I mean to the soldiers, who are supposed to guard them) to anyone who
offers them enough Schnaps (snap) or - - perhaps - - money. (More so after the
collapse of the Soviet Empire! - J.Z., 24.4.03.)
-----------------
Cooperation,
piece work. There are no contradictions. Take as an example the agrarian
cooperatives in Italy, which in the time
between 1905 and 1914 farmed the great estates of feudal lords. Every worker
was at the same time an employee of the cooperative and a member. The workers
got as wages, at the end of the week, an amount corresponding to the
piece work they had performed. From time to time there was also distributed (or
credited) an additional amount which the cooperative had earned for its members.
This additional amount was distributed in proportion to the to the wages paid.
So the lazy (or weak) worker was also disadvantaged in his quality as a member,
and the diligent (or strong) worker gained an additional advantage as a member.
I do not know of a better system.
One can say that
their wages were an advance to the workers from the cooperative's earnings and
they were so taken by the workers. Every exploitation of the diligent by the
lazy was excluded by this system. One can also say, that the additional amount
was the former employer's profit - now distributed to the workers.
---------------
lt is true, workers
and their unions do not like piece work. In Germany they say:
"Akkord-Arbeit ist Mord-Arbeit". (Piece work is murderous. -
Dubreuil's comments about it are worth reading. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)But things
change at once when the worker becomes and employer himself. Then he introduces
piece work as quickly as he would abolish it, if he could, in firms led by
employers.
The error, that working fast may increase unemployment,
arises unavoidably in the brain of average workers. But there are also
professors of political economy that share this view. But if the worker is a
member of a cooperative, then his thought is: If I work faster, I can go home
earlier. (An average employer would not let him go home earlier.) So the
mere form of cooperative organisation of labour tends to invent means for
working faster and to introduce them. The wage system does the contrary. This
fact outweighs many disadvantages of the cooperative system.
---------------
A still greater
advantage may be that, if the present employers become managers of a
cooperative (their factory being organised as a cooperative), then they are
safe during the next social revolution. On the other hand, it may well be that
they do not earn less than they do now. What has changed is the legal form of
their income, not - - probably - - the amount. In Russia, where not all
things are foolishly arranged, many former employers (I heard) gain as managers
no less than before. Did you ever hear about these things in your trip to
Russia?
--------------
Banking. I you will
retain the expression Banking for note-issuing, although most people
today understand by "Banking" exclusively deposit-business, you
certainly will explain, in your next edition, that a Banker should also be a
note-issuer and if he will not be one, then he does not understand his
business.
The title of your
first edition: "Industrial Justice by Banking Reform" was excellent.
It made at once clear, that there was not merely a technical matter
dealt with but that an essential question of right and wrong was
involved. Now some readers may get the impression that you offer first of all a
contribution to the quantity theory of money, proving that really Free
Banking can never produce an inflation. But you offer much more than the
present title promises; you provided a contribution to the theory of the best
distribution of the social product, "best" taken in the sense
of how necessary justice is here and that it requires, essentially, no further
social reforms. Insofar your book is also an attack on the present system of
taxation, something that is also not expressed in the present title but was
hinted at in the former one.
-----------------
Runge seems
to confound private note-issuing with free note-issuing. Free is
here essentially also private, but private is not free, if it supposes a
permit by the government. The latter was regularly the supposition of private
note-issuing in Germany. In one of my next letters I hope to give you a list of
the 37 private banks of issue that existed in Germany (all chartered) when the
Banking Law of 14. III. 1875 came into operation, on 1. I. 1876.
Runge says, that I
described a German system of Free Banking in the Annals of Collective Economy,
Jan./ July 1934, pages 93-96. On these pages I wrote against the cours forcé
and in very sharp expressions. But neither there nor in other pages or
publications did I describe a system of German Free Banking. If you have time
to read my modest contribution and desire it (it's now 16 years old): Williams
& Norgate, London, Great Russell Street, formerly sold the
"Annals" and, possibly, still sell them. I do hope the German bombs
did not destroy the shop. My two other publications were sold at Williams and
Norgate as well. The translation is not the best and critics blamed the
translator. I would excuse him, because the economics language of modern
English does not offer quite equivalent terms for many of the old notions.
Moreover, the modern German language of economics is so degenerated that
foreign students do no longer understand it (which honours the students).
Your impression,
that the small German States all suffered from much State control in the matter
of note-issue is quite right. The control was so sharp and without
understanding of what is essential in note-issuing, that the many note-issuing
banks, whose charter became void (by renunciation and other reasons), had all
together not much more than 100 million marks of "uncovered" notes
outstanding. The 7 note-issuing banks still surviving on 1. 1. 1876 had, on
this day, about 92 million marks of non-covered outstanding notes. (Four of
these banks survived, until Schacht strangled them.)
The main impediment
of the banks was the obligation or redemption. Option-clauses were unknown or
forbidden. They would also not have been a great help. The Bank of Prussia,
later Reichsbank, collected their notes and then, from time to time, presented all
of them together. In the case of an option-clause, the Prussians would simply
have waited until the option-clause's delay was over.
The denominations
of the notes were too large. The superstition of the time - - shared by the
best economists - - was that small notes "drive out the precious
metals" - - the same superstition existed in England, where notes smaller
than L 5 were prohibited. The German banking law of 1875 prohibited notes
smaller than those of 100 Marks, obviously copying the English prescription.
For wages these notes were of little use and, therefore, the bank's help for
employers was as good as zero. (J.Z.: At least as far as wage payments were
concerned. - J.Z., 24.5.03.) But in the mere commercial sphere the banks did
much good.
The fear, that small notes would drive out gold and silver,
was shared by Adam Smith. Errors of the great may become disasters for the
people.
Before 1876 the
limit was less than 100 marks. I forgot the amount. But I kept in my memory
that it was set not small enough.
Roscher reports that
in Prussia the minimum amount was, since 1856, ten Thalers (30 Shillings)/ The
State Bank of Prussia was permitted to issue 10-Thaler Notes for the total
amount of 10 million Thalers. Private Banks were forbidden to issue more than
10 % of their total note issues in 10-Thaler Notes.
Roscher recommends
the articles of Gilbart and Newmarch in the London Statistical Journal, Vol.
XIV, XV, XVII, XIX and in Vol. VI of Tooke's "History of Prices".
A book about the
old German note-issue-system? I will try to find such a book. Roscher
recommends an article of McCulloch in the Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1858,
"On metallic and paper money and banks".
Roscher quotes the
words of Patterson in the Stat. Journal of 1871, page 345, on the
Peels-Act:
"… perhaps the
most absurd and disastrous act, which was ever placed upon the Statute
Book."
(J.Z.: There exists
a German, 1943 and 144 pages dissertation on the subject, by a pupil of Prof.
H. Rittershausen, which I published on microfiche in PEACE PLANS. 792: Dr.
Traute Schumacher, Die Entwicklung der Banknote in Deutschland. [The
development of the Banknote in Germany.] It contains some important historical
details and distinctions for monetary theory and practice. I also appended some
correspondence on it by Prof. H. Rittershausen and myself and comments by U. v.
Bth. Dr. T. S. did not become an advocate of free banking. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
------------------
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 8. I. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
race-differences do not justify differences in rights
but they do exist. And it is good to remember them from time to time.
Tucholsky
was an author who collaborated in the
monthly "Weltbuehne", a paper less convenient to the Nazis than any
other. In January 1933 they tried to arrest Tucholsky, but he could flee to
Paris. (There he starved; in vain he tried to get some victuals by selling
pencils from door to door.) But Ossietzky, the editor, was caught and murdered.
His widow now publishes a new "Weltbuehne", a Communist paper, whose
tediousness surpasses all limits.
Tucholsky was -
that's my opinion - - an anarchist. But he took things as they are. He also
published some stories about race etc. differences. (J.Z.: Although I am
usually not interested in poetry, I found some of his poems worth reading,
especially his anti-war ones. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
---------------
At an international
contest the delegates were asked to prove their artistic skill by drawing a circle.
The American came up at once with a tool that drew mathematically
exact circles: "the biggest in the world". The Englishman drew his
circle without any apparatus and it was as good as exact. The Frenchman drew an
oval, with rich ornaments, flowers and such things. The Austrian said:
"Why try to surpass things that cannot be bettered?" - and copied the
English circle, with the help of tracing paper. The German drew a polygon of
1096 edges. It looked like a circle but it was not.
---------------
At some occasion
four Germans had obliged themselves to contribute 100 marks each to some
humanitarian purpose. The man from Hamburg simply paid. The man from the Rhine
forgot the matter. The man from Berlin paid, 6 months later 1,80 marks as the
first part-payment and added that his partner was abroad. The Saxon did not
remember for a long time, then he was sued, lost the case and gave a bill of
exchange which nobody could realise.
----------------
I enclose the
German paper from which I took these jokes (if you will let them pass as such).
----------------
Rittershausen reported to me that Zander
is now in India & speaks to the Muslims. He tries to win them for his
ideas, which mean an honourable peace between the Arabs and the Jews. He
considers the matter as important, probably because Arab resistance was financed
(all things in the world must be financed) by Indian money. But - - as Truth
reported some months ago - - the Israelis had much more money than the Arabs
and bribed first the Syrians and then the others. Did Zander not know that? He
should read Truth regularly; it's worthwhile and this not merely from a
Zionist point of view. As long as the Arabs remain what they are, they will
accept money from both sides, with perfect impartiality and always go
the way of least mental resistance, which is the way of nature, although not in
all cases the way of honour, until - - yes - - until there arises a second Djezzar
Pasha among them. (You remember: The man, who could not be bribed, who
vanquished the great Napoleon before Akka. He was in constant alliance with
England. Sir William Sidney Smith defended Akka so effectively,
that Napoleon said at St. Helena: "He prevented me from fulfilling proper
destiny." A second Djezzar, allied
with a second Sir Smith, will - - probably - - incorporate the little Israel into
a greater Arab-Syrian-Turkish commonwealth.
Very faithfully
Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
Dou you think that
much of the Indian money found its way to the ammunition factories? I think
that it was sent by the Arab leaders to English banks and is still there,
reduced by devaluation.
-----------------
Bth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 10.
I. 1950
Dear Mr. Meulen,
yesterday I received the
promised printed matters. The content is most interesting. Thank you
very much.
1.) Thinker's Digest, Winter 1949,
2.) Die Nuwe Orde. 31.X.49.
3.) The Free Trader, Nov./Dec. 1949,
4.) National News-Letter, 29. XII. 49,
5.) City Press, 16., 23., 30. XII. 49.,
6.) The Malthusian, Nov., Doc., 1949,
7.) The Economist, 24. XII. 1949.
8.) Truth, 16., 23., 30. XII. 1949.
---------------
I read your article in Truth, page 774, issue of 30.
XII., with much pleasure. All what you say is true and I see no objection that
can be reasonably raised.
You say: "It
may sound foolish to assert that Korean, Fijian, Dutch and other nationalities
should have a voice in our
foreign policy."
Nationalities. What
are they? In some cases they are that which some persons, lawyers without
clients, physicians without patients,
manufacturers without commitments - desire to be and to come into
existence. Let me take the "nation" of the Wends (Sorbs) as an
example. Before 1914 this "nation" (some of them dwelling in the
province Brandenburg, some in Saxonia) were proud of being Prussians.
The Prussian Kings, in one of their numerous titles, called themselves
"Herzog der Wenden und Kassuben" and always favoured a little their
Slavic (Wendian) subjects. Money for agricultural improvements was always to be
got by the inhabitants of the "Spreewald" (as their district was
called), even if other agrarian districts had to wait, roads in the Spreewald
were good, and if the market for the agrarian products became "weak",
the Prussian army offered some contracts to the Spreewald. All that was done
without much noise.
Their neighbours and at Berlin one liked the Wends much.
Nurses were taken, if possible, from the Spreewald, because the girls had a
good reputation for being healthy, patient and being fond of children. Also
their honesty was more than average. At the parks of Berlin always some Spreewäldlerinnen"
were to be seen in their old-fashioned, but very nice dresses, for which red
and green colours were not spared. Their skirts were - - already for centuries
- - very short, which contributed much to their popularity, as far as soldiers
and other young men were concerned. I never saw a face among the
Spreewald-girls which was not beautiful. If they were entre eux, they talked
their Slavic language, but most of them spoke German very well, although a
little in the Slavic manner, that in, all syllables to be pronounced
"long" were pronounced "short", since in Slavic languages
all syllables are pronounced
"short". (Russian spies of Slavic nationality are impossible in
Germany. At the first words they speak, they are recognized, even if they speak
German better than Germans themselves, which sometimes occurs, the German
language being - - as is well known - - one of the most difficult ones. People
of the lower classes seldom are quite masters of the language.) The Wendian
language was cultivated by academies, and the Prussian kings did what they
could to keep the language alive. But the Wendians themselves more and more
preferred German, simply for commercial purposes. At the covered markets - -
where the housewives liked the Wendians much, for the excellent quality of
their products and their honesty - - one had to speak German, although many
housewives understood some Wendenian
words, like "shmand" for cream. Also their young men had the ambition
to leave the army - - after having done their service - - as sergeants. They
were excellent sergeants, but - - of course - - perfect knowledge of German was
a condition for becoming a seageant.
At elections
Wendians always preferred candidates of monarchist parties.
All that changed
when a teacher and a physician, after the first world war, discovered the
Wendian nationality. They summoned the Wendians to "shake off"
the "Prussian yoke" and to unite with their "brethren", the
Czechs. For many years the only real success was that the teacher and his political
friends suddenly had money to buy a nice house and an elegant auto. Also the
edition of their paper multiplied. The Wendians were not so blocked as
the politicians supposed and wished. The villas and cars
were an effective propaganda against the whole movement, whose origin nobody
doubted. And now? The Russians discovered, that the Wendian language was a mere
Russian slang and introduced the Russian language into the Wendian schools,
while the wealthy of the Wendian peasants were expropriated. The Czechs
continued to claim the Wendians as Czech "brethren", but now
they have no more to say than the Wendians themselves, that is nothing. In the
whole history of the Wendians as a
nationality (not as people) there were always no more than
5 % of the Wendians who spoke for their nationality and demanded
"independence".
So it is with the
Indians. "Truth" estimated the number of those, who know what
"national independence" means,
as about 200,000 and stated, that England really did not cede to the 400
million Indians but to the 200,000 "intellectuals", now speaking for
the Indian nation. I myself think that the number of 200,000 is much
exaggerated and that the real number is no higher than about 50,000. Here in
Berlin, as long as the Prussian State Library still stood, I often had an
occasion to talk with Indian students. I asked them, how many of their
countrymen at this moment were talking about "Indian Independence".
They admitted that probably none of them talked about such a theme, one
so far from the real Indian mentality. One estimated, that more then
half certainly talked about women and the rest of cigarettes and other things
concerning eating, drinking, lodging, etc., the same as in Europe.
Would it be right
to admit an influence to these 200,000 on English affairs, so as if the 200,000
had the political interests and understanding of 200,000,000 cultivated
Englishmen?
I think that
individualism supplies the principles here to be applied, and at another
occasion (at the moment my time is very limited, although not by money to
provide things) I might submit my ideas to you, if you agree.
-------------
You marked the
"Economist's" little article "Commercial education" (issue
of 31. XII.), page 1462. My friend, Alexander Carr-Saunders (B. spelled it:
Sounders, which seems to me unlikely for an English name. - J.Z.)(our
friendship being somewhat one-sided, he being without knowledge of my
existence) contributes valuable ideas to the subject. But let me remind you
that the Old Romans educated young men first of all by taking them to
the courts and letting them hear lectures of lawyers and decisions of judges.
It was their opinion that at the courts one could learn what laws needed
improvements, what manners, schemes of treaties, etc. needed reform as well and
wow things go in practice. There the young man also got an immediate and deep
impression of the great superiority which philosophical studies and
"classical" learning do bestow. He also gets an immediate impression
of the fact that a great part of men is not able to talk before courts, because
he is not able to learn the language there spoken. He knows only the language
of households and inns. At the courts he gets the understanding what that
means, politically, and that it would not be a good policy to let these people
vote on affairs that are really only understood by the well educated, although
they are important for all. From that impression the young men get the notion
of the best political organisation, and all that without a special instruction.
At the court the young man gets also an impression of the natural rights of man
and citizen, that means of rights, which neither a Caesar nor a democratic
majority may take from the - - momentarily - - weaker party. From history - - perhaps
of his own family - - the young men learnt, that if natural rights are
violated, then a revolutionary never fails to appear, who tells the injured
what rights were suppressed and uses
this suppression as a pretext to become a dictator.
If I could speak to
Carr-Saunders, I would tell him: Let the young men learn from court
deliberations, at least once every week - - but more frequently if this can be
done. I beg to mention here a detail from my own education. At the age of about
18, I had to do with many branches of the insurance business. I also had the
good luck to find, at the library of Frankfurt on the Main (now destroyed), the
collection of decisions of the German High Court (Reichsgericht). The VII-th
Senate was celebrated for its excellent decisions in insurance cases.
Therefore, I proceeded thus: At first I
read what the Germans call the "Tatbestand" (facts of the case).Then
I asked myself, what the decision must
be, if it would be just. Then I read, how the Senate really decided and found
at once my own errors. So I proceeded with more than hundred decisions and
until today I like to study the decisions of High Courts. If I became an
above-average insurance-man (some of my friends assert this), whose articles
were sometimes read with interest, I ascribe that result to my study of law
suits.
------------------
Rural
overpopulation in Russia and elsewhere. ("Economist of 31 XII. 49, page
1454.) Here the Economist sees things in the same light as old Malthus saw
them, which reminds me of the method of seeing that Plato described in
his tale of the great cave, where men observe the shadows produced by a
great fire on the one side and the real things on the other. (Republica. I don't know the chapter, the book being burnt.)
If in any country
of the world new and very cheap (cheaper than the before known) methods of
producing victuals are discovered or applied, then at any point of the world a
part of the population loses its job and the country will seem to be
overpopulated. That was the case in Imperial Russia, when Romania, Hungary etc.
began to produce victuals and to export them cheaper the Russians could produce
them, with their primitive ploughs and the few inches deep that they could
plough with them. Stolypin, very great as economist, although a too
monarchistic politician, did kill two flies with one hit and sent the
surplus-population from Southern Russia to Siberia, there build villages, gave
credits, etc., so that Siberia soon got more than 15 millions inhabitants and
produced victuals cheaper
than any country in the world. Much of the butt49 sold at Berlin came
from Siberia and was of excellent quality.
(J.Z.: Compulsory resettlements in distant areas was hardly
a rightful and economic solution to the problem of agricultural unemployment
and I do doubt that butt49 or any other produce can really be produced cheaper
in Siberia than anywhere else. Siberian butt49 in Berlin was, probably, as
State-subsidised produced. Sometimes B. was inclined to exaggerate, to make a
point. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
An overpopulation produced by a surplus of victuals
is more contrary to Maltusianism than any other thing in the world and yet was
frequently observed. (Observed things hardly interest Malthusians, they
reflect, prophesise etc.
and speak of the future.)
In Germany before 1914 there was much emigration from the
Eastern provinces, where victuals were cheap,
plentiful and sold with difficulties, to the industrialised West, where
victuals were much dearer and the greatest part had to be imported.
The Economist
prophesies that in Africa improvements in medical services will produce
"a pressure, of mouths on food supplies", (is the E.'s expression
good English?? "…pressure of mouths …") Of course, the
contrary will be observed. Every man kept alive can produce in Africa victuals
for at least 10 persons and what will be increased will be the
"pressure" of victuals on "mouths." (I learnt that in Chinese
one does not say: the country has 1 million
inhabitants or souls but there one says: 1 million mouths, which
is certainly more correct than "souls", the existence of souls
being a little doubtful since David
Hume, but never, and this long before Hume, that a mouth
belongs to every man.)
In the whole time
from Malthus's birth (1766), until 1914 there was not one year where
overpopulation caused a lack of victuals, although bad harvests sometimes did.
(1772, 1788, 1817, 1847, 1855, 1872 - - the latter only in a few countries.)
But in every year there were difficulties for the selling of victuals or - -
purely commercially seen - - an overproduction of victuals. (Most in 1718 and
from about 1880 to 1897.)
Malthus says: There
has never been an overproduction of victuals and never can be. Facts? MY
premeditated opinion outweighs every fact!!!
------------------
What you wrote in
your letter of 3.1.1950 of a German "The Individualist", induced me
to talk about the matter to a bookseller I know. He is no Anarchist and perhaps
not even an Individualist but an intelligent man. I proposed to him the name
"Die Opposition" and framed - - very hastily - - some points for a
future program. He objected, that he was a poor man without any capital. I
taught him, that he was biased by quite old-fashioned ideas. All great things
in the world were performed by credit.
(J.Z.: Here less financial credit is required
than credit or belief in the value of such a periodical for a sufficient number
of interested people. They existed then neither in England nor in Germany
- for a printed journal of a
considerable number of impressions. Meulen may have had only about 150 - 200
subscribers at most and probably subsidised this journal himself, as I did and
do with my PEACE PLANS. - Now almost
anyone could afford to "finance" himself a journal that is produced
only upon demand and only in alternative media like microfiche, floppy disks,
e-mail and websites. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
Alexander, called by his courtiers and, consequently, by
historians, "the Great", began with debts of many thousands of
talents. (Here it should not be forgotten that he was the son of the Macedonian
king! Thus he was born "with a silver-spoon in his mouth", as the old
saying states. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
Napoleon I, Napoleon III. (The latter 40 millions of
francs), Caesar, Hitler (9 million Gold-marks), they all began with debts.
I advised this bookseller to get at least 100,000 Marks of debts.
(J.Z.: Today millions to billions would be required. - J.Z., 24.5.03.) Then
everybody and his creditors more than all others will help him. The man
with capital is always exploited, taxed to death and plays the role of a
pot filled with honey surrounded by a swarm of flies. The man with debts is
treated with more care than an egg, so that people may not loose money through
him.
Plutarch reports: When Eumenes, a general of
Alexander, but, as it seems, greater than he, was on the point of being
murdered by his commanders, he simply touched them for many talents. The effect
was quite the expected: All commanders
were now as busy to protect him as before they were before, when preparing to
murder him.
--------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(J.Z.: Yes, for such things or "beasts" or
"heroes" or "leaders" and their "ideas" one can
get credit and followers. It's not so easy for an individualistic periodicals,
although all of us are supposed to be individuals and each considers himself to
be the centre of the universe. There is also such a thing as bad debts and not
all people are prepared to throw good money after bad. The objective of many of
the old wars was loot from involuntary victims. One cannot loot voluntary
subscribers, especially not individualists. Looting other "faithful",
with their consent, is often possible. - J.Z., 18.2.03. - However, now we do
have the extremely affordable alternative media and, nevertheless, they are
still extremely under-utilised for publishing libertarian magazines and books!
Who is to be blamed for that??? - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
11. I. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
yesterday I received the issues of September and December (Nr. 4 1 & 44 of
the monthly "L'unique", publié par E. Armand, 22, Cité Sait- Joseph, Orléans
(Loiret).
I was invited to subscribe to this paper, which took its
name from the book of Max Stirner, Der Einzige und sein Eigentum",
in French "L'Unique et sa Propriété" and is devoted to Individualist
Anarchism. Subscription for 10 numbers = 180
Francs. Each number contains 24 pages, the size of the sheet of paper before
you. (A4 - J.Z.)
The paper speaks de
omnibus rebus et quibusdam aliis, excepting Free Banking and things connected
with it, but what there is said is well said. I find articles of vegetarians,
Malthusians, Esperantists, pacifists and all this kind of reformers, which you
know well.
I would subscribe if
A.) I had the money,
B.) there were not the regulations concerning foreign exchange.
At Paris the Individualists have their "Centre",
8, Place Saint-Sulpice (au coin de la rue des Canettes), Métro Saint-Sulpice,
salle du 1er étage. It seems there are lectures every month. The last was at
26. décembre by André C.-J. Gaillard, "22 ans de fréquentation naturiste -
végétarienne - espérantiste-pacifiste".
Among the named friends of the movement I find that of
Madeleine Vernet, Directrice de la "Mère Educatrice", who played some
role at the République Supranationale of H. L. Follin and was (and very
probably still is) a very sympathetic
girl. Street is not indicated.
(Paris - -
there I was in 1926 and only for 8 days, with hardly any free hours, but
when I arrived at the Gare du Nord, I felt at home, as if I would have been
born in Paris. The town, the men - - all, all was as if I belonged to them. The
police would not extend its permission de séjour, because they could not
imagine "que mon séjour serait au profit de la France".
----------------
My friend (where
may he be now?) (*) Werner Ackermann, the founder of the "Cosmopolitische
Union", who spoke French as well as
German - - he was born at Antwerp - - once said to me: In French there may be
easily said things which seem important, are nice to be read, but mean
nothing. In German that would be difficult, except if it is translated from the
French. In Nr. 44 of the "L'Unique" I find such a passage:
"La véritable
objection de conscience nést ni religieuse ni anti-religieuse. Elle prend sa
source dans la volonté de l'homme réconcilié avec lui-même, libre de tous
attache avec le milieu et capable de se diriger sans maîtres parmi les
escalves."
Now you know it,
too.
------------------
But
"L'Unique" is more worth than the money it costs, all in all, and I
would not fail to report to you about the "L'Unique,", since it may
not be quite impossible that you did not yet hear of it.
-------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(*) Werner Ackermann found refuge from the Nazis in South
Africa. He published there at least one short book on the Negro question, as a
novella and was somewhat active, I believe, in the movement that opposed the
blockade of S.A., as harming mainly those it was supposed to help. He and his
children do not seem to have carried on the exploration of the minority
autonomy options that he had long discussed, in a letter exchange with B.,
filling two thick "Leitz-Ordner". Both sides of that correspondence
are, apparently, lost. However, it is not impossible that he has written a
still unpublished work on this subject. - Conventional publishers would
certainly not have flooded him with offers for such a manuscript, although in
such writings lies the main answer to most of the remaining problems in Africa
- and in the rest of the world. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v .Beckerath, …
12. I. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
with very great interest I read Lord Raglan's article "Mythical Heroes", condensed, in
"Thinker's Digest" of Winter 1949. Here really seems to be found a
method to distinguish myths and old, uncertain history. At the
moment, I do not remember any historical hero, to whom Raglan's 22
points may be attributed. But better historians than I would, perhaps. I beg to
write something about Raglan's discovery in one of my next letters.
Raglan counts Moses
among the heroes. I do admit, that Raglan uses the word in the sense of man
considered as a hero in old times. Goethe, in his notes to the
"Westöestlicher Divan" (most interesting to read) points out, that
Moses was by no means a hero - - the word taken in the popular sense - - but a
quite incapable man, who had to be instructed by his father-in-law (Exodus
18,14) in the first principles of administration.
Generally, the
Biblical Patriarchs were no heroes nor may Raglan's 22 points be applied to
them. That confirms me in my opinion, that they were historical persons,
interesting insofar as from their history may be seen what was considered, in
old times, to be honourable and what not, and that in our times they would
certainly not be in the least esteemed, not among Jews, either. I do exempt
Abraham, who abolished the Moloch-Religion and replaced the child-sacrifices by
animal sacrifices - - an enormous progress at that time. Maybe he invented a
new god to better perform the destruction of the Moloch cult. Also Abraham was
an opponent of the principle of collective responsibility. (Genesis,
chapter18). Further, he forbade the sexual perversities - - in French named "le vice allemand" (with the
same right as the Germans called syphilis "Franzosen-Krankheit", that
is, without any right) which are described in Genesis, 19, 5. The story told
there concerns Abraham's brother Lot, but one may suppose that Abraham's
opinion about the thing was the same.
A chieftain, who
proclaimed such a religion, really might expect "to become a great people".
All newly married couples in the neighbourhood of Abraham, very probably, fled
to him, because they were sure, that he did not burn the firstborn, as the
other chieftains did. Also all families threatened by a vendetta, for a murder
or theft committed by a member, were safe at Abraham, who did not acknowledge
the principle of collective responsibility. That he was an adversary of sexual
perversities (still widespread at the place where Sodom and Gomorrha were
destroyed - - I read reports of travellers) must have recommended him to all
people with sane minds.
(Panarchism a
small example. - J.Z.)
In Arabia, as in
all countries where cattle-breeding prevails, the secession of families from
their tribe and their joining another tribe, better governed, is still
frequent and tempers very much the despotism of chieftains.
(J.Z.: But how much can be achieved, even through
panarchism, among nomadic and custom- as well as religion-ridden tribal people?
- J.Z., 24.5.03.)
---------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 14.
I. 1950, Your letter of 11. I. 50,
received today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I do hope to be able to do more than I can presently do for
the creation of a German "The Individualist", once my old age pension
is granted. Then I will have more liberty than now to write, use tramways,
etc., all necessary for the preparatory work. But the spark you kindled will be
kept alive.
(J.Z.: His old age pension was much too small to permit him
such luxury spending. - By now his Renten-file at the BfA is probably
destroyed. It could have provided an interesting record of his employments. -
J.Z., 24.5.03.)
I think that not
only the idea of Individualism but also that of Free Banking will get adherents
if they are represented as good as is technically possible. It corresponds to
the German mentality (that is my impression) to take principles serious once
their technical realisation is made clear. Also the German
"intellectual" tends more to generalise from a fact and derive a
principle from the fact, than to start from the principle and try to find out
the possibilities of its realisation. That here is not displayed a general
human tendency, I conclude from the tendency of so many French reformist
writings. Here the principles are the foundation and sometimes one
feels, in reading them, as in the Spaniard saying is: "papan viento"
(swallow air - - Luft schlucken). That as my impression of some passages of the
"L'Unique", of which I wrote you some days ago.
Seeing that so many
intelligent men, for decades, have proposed to publish papers in the two
languages, French and German, and sometimes realised that idea (Revue
Franco-Germanique. etc.) it would be certain, that such a paper would submit to
the best critics plans, proposals etc., which are merely technically founded,
which latter is a common fault of plans and propositions of German origin and
that it would also submit to the best critics those principles, ideas, etc.,
which are technically not sufficiently founded, which is a common fault of
plans and propositions of French origin.
It is my impression
that the Indians, likewise, restrict themselves to principles,
still more so than the French and that the Chinese, in confining
themselves to the technical aspects of new ideas do surpass the Germans. If
that would be found to be true, then this would be a further reason for an
international collaboration between them. It may be that better connoisseurs of
philosophical and economic literature than I do get quite different
impressions. At least there are very many exceptions from the general
rule, which I believe to exist since the time of about 1740 (the year when
Frederic II of Prussia ascended the throne) from which year Voltaire
dated the beginning of the "enlightenment".
(Seeing Frederic's
early wars merely as youthful follies, but with mass-murderous
consequences, I cannot agree with Voltaire's date selection. F. became somewhat
wise, as a ruler, only some years afterwards. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
In a German
"Individualist" it would, perhaps, be quite suitable to demand
from the first day the right of issuing standardised cheques for the purpose of
paying wages and securing the payment of wages. That many do understand,
who do not understand that the State's monopoly of money injures workers
and employers.
It would also be
advisable - - I think - - to demand, from the first day, for workers and others
the right to care themselves for their old age, sickness etc. and this better
than the government does now. A noticeable movement against "social
insurance" is wide-spread in Germany, also here in Berlin, already since
1945. Principles that justify such tendencies would probably be received with
sympathy - - if proclaimed together with the possibilities for their practical
application.
(J.Z.: I worked in Berlin's public "Social
Insurance" for the first 7 1/2 years of my working life. With the single
exception of Heinz Peter Neumann, deceased, a Gesellian freedom lover, and
Beckerath himself, I never encountered, either among my lecturers, my
co-workers nor among the "insured" public, a serious interest in such
problems and in their solution. They were all "good" statists and
accepted all too faithfully all the wrongful and nonsensical legislation in
that sphere as gospel, i.e., showed no interest in rightful and sound
alternatives, especially when it came to financing social insurance and making
it a voluntary business, one safe from monetary and financial despotism. B.,
having worked in the general insurance field for decades, had probably a few
more contacts among some of the older and leading insurance men, but also, I
believe, less among those at the grass roots level. But he often complained
that most people did not even distinguish between "social reform" in
general and "reform of the social insurance" arrangements. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
"The first
million was the most difficult to be won", said Rothschild, whenever he
explained his opinions about money-making. Analogously: To win the first 500
subscribers will be most difficult. From 500 to 5000 the way will be easier.
------------------
Cooperation. That
is true: The payment of organising work, that cannot be done by piece-work, may
become a weak point of cooperatives. General principles to determine the value
of organising work are not yet fixed, as far as 1 know. The latter circumstance
proves, that the cooperators themselves did not yet take their cooperative
principle very serious. Moreover, if the best manner to pay for organized work
should already be determined by an enlightened economist, then it is,
nevertheless, true that this manner has not yet been sufficiently discussed and
for this reason remains practically unknown.
My own determination would be: A free market for the
organisation work. If cooperatives don't pay enough (to capable managers and
functionaries, foremen etc. - J.Z.), then the concerned persons would apply to
employers who do, or become employers themselves.
Nietzsche thinks
that a moderate payment for organisation work is essential. May be that he is
right. For at least two centuries the high government officials, who determine the
forms of living for the whole population, got a much smaller income than
average rich people in the country. A minister or a councillor to the
government always earn much less than one of the great merchants or an owner of
a great factory.
(J.Z.: Do they really earn what they do get or, if
judged by results, should they rather have to pay their involuntary victims a
huge compensation? - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
For a time, in Catholic countries, the Jesuits ruled - - in
practice - - the country, so as they do now (it is said) in Spain. The standard
of life of Jesuits always has been very moderate. The few exceptions are
of no importance and cannot be considered as typical. The same man, who
disposes of more money than great millionaires and with more real power (behind
the curtain) than the ruler, lives - - often - - more modest than an average
worker. Mutatis mutandis the same seems to be true for Russia's rulers in the
Kremlin and their staffs. Their standard of living - -
with very few exceptions - - is not better than that of an
average street car man in the USA. I think the reports about the standard of
living of Russian Ministers etc. are true. I think also that the modesty of
this standard of living is an essential factor for the respect the people feels
for its rulers, and the rulers know that.
(J.Z.: Incentives are subjective. Many are more addicted to
power than to high monetary rewards. As for Soviet rulers, I do believe that
fear played a much larger role than respect. That they live in relative luxury,
when compared with most of their subjects, was very well known. I doubt very
much that their "fat cats" were widely respected. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
---------------------
The combination of
piece work with the cooperative principle at the agricultural cooperatives in
Italy and elsewhere is less - - I think - - a combination of piece work with
profit sharing than a matter of the distribution of profit. The
whole of the profit belongs to the cooperatives.
---------------
The manager of a
cooperative may have no less incentives to win a fortune than an employer. The
manager may save a part of his income. If the factory savings department,
perhaps organised by himself - - grants an interest of 1 % monthly (which in
very many cases it could), the manager can do no better than to save with his
own factory. Then, after 25 years, he will be richer than an average employer.
May be it will
happen, that in future a manager, who will become an employer, says to his
associates (that is: to his workers): Listen - - I am ready to stabilise
your income for - - say - - 5 years. Let us take as your stabilised income the
amount you got for the last (say 3) years. I create a stabilisation fund and,
after 5 years, the surplus of the fund will be mine (or a percentage of it).
Very probably most workers will accept such an offer, for they hate a
system of varying income, although a varying income is
essential for cooperative organisation.
(J.Z.: I remember reading about a poll among English
workers. They voted overwhelmingly for a stable but lower income than a varying
income that would, over a year, bring them a higher return. These are the kinds
of people so dependent in their habits and thinking, that they want the
employer to pay them for their holidays, their sick-days etc. They are still
serfs rather than free contractors. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
It may also happen,
that the stabilisation of worker's incomes (that is the replacement of varying
cooperative incomes by the wage system - - the latter duly reformed) will take
the form of an insurance against fluctuations.
In any case, the names
"employer" and "wage-system" are so discredited that they
should be replaced also in those cases where the employment system procures to
workers a higher income and more freedom than the cooperative system. (The freedom
to hold political opinions, of religion, of belonging to reform parties,
etc. is - - presently - - greater
at private employers than at cooperatives, where the majority principle governs
and that is
seldom tolerant.
(J.Z.: Most cooperatives have also subscribed, without
sufficient criticism, to cooperative ideologies and platforms that are often
neither fully right nor rational. Sectarian forms of cooperation exist, as they
do in the field of religion. Sound principles haven't sufficiently replaced
dogmas and many sound experiences remain ignored. Only fully free competition
and publicity for all forms of organisation development will bring about a
wide-spread knowledge of optimal forms in this sphere. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
That in general
workers are much less tolerant than employers is well known but rarely
sufficiently appreciated. I got my first experience with this 50 years ago.
Then an employer, who employed about a dozen girls, had very much trouble in
keeping those girls in his service, who had an illegitimate child. The female
workers demanded the dismissal of the "immoral" colleague. They
plagued her much as they could in order to drive her out. But at last the
employer won. At Hamburg I heard of an employer in the
"Darm-Verarbeitung" (processing of bowels) who only employed girls
with a child. He did not always have the trouble with the haughty girls, who
had no child, or not yet. A cooperative, probably, would not have been able to
help these unmarried mothers; but in our days things seem to have changed, in
many districts. (To pious Christians it proves that the devil wins more and
more influence; to the social reformer it proves that progress is possible where
even optimists 50 years ago believed it impossible.
---------------
You write: "We
do not expect a social revolution here." Well - - but I answer with
Mephisto in Goethe's "Faust": "Den Teufel spürt das Völkchen
nie, und wenn er sie beim Kragen hätte."
The revolution of
1918 was quite unexpected, even to socialist leaders, who, in consequence, were
without a
program. The same is true of the social revolution under the
Nazis. That was a social revolution and only the events of 1945 stopped
it. The tendency was quite the same as during the Jacobine Revolution of
1792/1794. The secret logic of history led quite illogical and very average men
to create, in less than two years, a social system which Lenin and Stalin
described quite rightly as a prodromus of communism. Even a man like
Robespierre was led by the events and did not lead them. Still in the year 1790
he published a journal "Le défenseur de la constitution", which was
by no means republican. That he really had no program is to be seen from his
papers found after his death in his chamber. (I possessed his Collected Works
and Manuscripts - - all burnt.) Madame Roland reports in her memoirs that one
day, at one of the conferences in her house - where Robespierre was a regular
guest - - he answered a republican: "Une république??? Qu'est ce que c'est
la?? White obviously, he was much further away from republican ideas than were
the Girondists.
I do expect a
social revolution in England, and my impression is even that England is in the
middle of such a revolution, so that what is still to be expected is merely the
bloody persecution of some minority, which every social revolution performs at
one stage. (As objects of persecution Jews are considered to be most fit, in
second line rich merchants - in Germany called "white Jews", - - and
manufacturers, in third line those whom the people denounces as
counter-revolutionaries, in the most cases neighbours with whom they have quarrels,
parents of whom they hope to be heirs etc. (For this there are many records
among the papers of the "Tribunal Révolutionnaire".)
If a government
offers the people the spectacle of public executions then it may remain in
power for many decades and even longer, incapable and blocked as it may be.
Compardon proved in
his work about the Tribunal Révolutionnaire, that most of the guillotined were
executed for infringung the price maximum laws. That was often expressed in
word like: Guilty of having assisted the Républic's enemies by selling salt for
... sous instead of at the legal price of … sous. Etc. In all countries
where an effective price control was introduced and, at last, by the logic of
facts became ineffective, the people demanded capital punishment for
"price sinners" and could only be stopped by the exaggeration of this
demand, that is: All that bought for an illegal price must be executed
as well. Here all were "sinners".
----------------
A critic declared the translation of my
dissertations into English as "decidedly bad". The lady, who
translated the manuscript (I am convinced that it was not Spiller himself, but
a lady) treated it with great freedom, so that in many passages the English text is more a
"paraphrase" than a translation. But very excellent is the French
translation of Professor Buriot-Darsiles at Moulens. There is hardly a
difference between the German text and the French. Buriot-Darsiles fully understood
the problems dealt with.
------------------
Princess Elizabeth.
Well - - I think too, that by now most Germans are republicans. They are
because there is now no man to be found who seems to be fit to be a king or an
emperor. If, in the year 1945, the King of England would have sent one of his
princes as a governor to the British zone and if no dismantling would have
taken place, the country would have been won for the English crown and now - -
5 years later - - the rest of Western Germany would have followed. It would
have become State like in the old German Empire until 1806 (1801? The
correction is illegible - J.Z.), with a ruler at the top and great independence
of the member States. The dismantlings now exclude such a possibility.
-----------------
If a high
"Citizen's tax" were introduced in a democratic country and the
non-payment of such a tax would be
punished by losing the right to vote, then all people not interested in
public affairs would renounce to the "right" to vote. That would transfer
the political power to those, who are interested in public affairs also at
other times than at the day of voting. It would be - - I think - - a political
progress. 7/8 of all women would renounce it and prefer to buy, for the saved
amount of Citizen's tax, something to eat.
There should also
be a limit for voting as among the old Romans, who limited the maximum age of a
voter to 6o years, the end of military services. Today the limit could perhaps
be at 70 or 75 years.
-------------------
To the candidates
now proposed to the English people the following questions should be submitted:
1.) Are you willing to grant to your voters the right to
overcome a lack of currency, which endangers the payment
of wages, by the
issuing of emergency currency through institutions chosen by the voters? Are
you willing to let
your voters
decide for themselves whether a shortage of currency is really to be feared?
2.) Are you willing to grant your voters the right to escape
a new devaluation by agreeing upon gold-wage-clauses
and other
suitable clauses as they themselves think suitable?
3.) Do you admit that a currency without cours forcé can
never produce an inflation?
4.) Will you try to propose to our government a system of
paying imports by means of payment of British origin,
fixed in Pounds,
Dollars or any other currency thought fit by the importing merchants? Do you
not think that
Americans demand
too much when they demand that we pay our imports with USA-Dollars of
USA-origin - -
which they never
did before in history and other governments also never did?????? (Actually, the
governments
should have
nothing to do with exports and imports and Americans do not have a uniform
opinion on that
matter but should
also have all monetary and financial rights and liberties. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
5.) Are you willing to grant your voters the right to create
their own system of social insurance, one more effective
than that of the
government and with the right of the voters (members! - J.Z.) to control
themselves the
accumulated
reserves?
----------------------
I heard that Robert
Owen demanded a general system of commitments (advance orders -
J.Z.), so that the greatest part of the nation's production would be backed by
commitments made in time.
A very good system.
A part or the
national product is sold without commitments because the consumers cannot do
without the goods and do have the money to pay for them.
Another part cannot
be sold, although the people need the goods urgently but do not possess the
means of payment for them.
A third part cannot
be sold because the people do not want the goods immediately, although they do
possess the means of payment to buy the goods. The well-known system of
continual underselling (to be distinguished from sound competition) helps in
this case to sell the products. Timely commitments would prevent underselling.
A fourth part
cannot be sold because it is not immediately wanted and also because the people
do not possess the necessary means of payment. That part, economically
considered the most dangerous of all and - - I estimate - - amounting to about 1/3rd
of the national product, requires a combined system of commitment and Free
Banking.
----------------
If you still
possess one copy of the Individualist's December issue, I would be much
obliged to you it you would send it to me occasionally. I distributed all my
copies to friends.
----------------
The "Thinkers
Digest" is s most excellent paper. Touching, the record of David Hume's
last hours. What men, David Hume and Adam Smith! I beg to write about them in
one of my next letters.
----------------
With a true horror
I read the South African "Die Nuwe Orde". Julius Streicher a
"martyr of Nuremberg"; a man,
whom the genius of earth, if he exists, would considers as one of his
lice.
I do regret that at
Nuremberg new laws with a retroactive power were created to punish the
"martyrs". Obviously, to the authors of these laws the Article 4 of
the Weimar Constitution of 11. 8. 1919 was unknown, which says:
"Die allgemein
anerkannten Regeln des Völkerrechts gelten als bindende Bestandteile des
deutschen
Reichsrechtes." (Generally recognized rules of the law of nations
are to be considered as parts of German
Constitutional
Laws.)
That applies at
once to the crimes of the German generals against the prisoners of war and the
civilians in the occupied territories. These generals could have been punished
on the strength of the quoted German law. But that law also applies to
minorities. It was and is one of the acknowledged rules of the law of nations
that minorities are not without any rights, also not if the country's
government claims or is really supported by the majority. That was stated in
the 1890's when the Russian and the Romanian Governments persecuted the Jews
or left them without protection during the pogroms.
The defence of
Streicher and his companions by Johan Schoeman (whose German name certainly was
or is: Johannes Schumann) reminds me of the fact reported by Plutarch,
that after the death of Nero his statues were adorned with flowers a
night, by Nero's adherents, whom he obviously possessed in great numbers - - a
shame for humanity.
------------------
Difficulties to sell
victuals on the whole earth. But "The Malthusian" continues to speak
of the scarcity of victuals as one of the causes of the present misery.
------------------
(J.Z.: Just like the Social Credit people, who are ascribing
the evils of monetary despotism of central banking to "free" private
banking and want, consequently, to replace the existing central banking system
by an even worse form of it. Or like the statist communists, dissatisfied with
the insufficient competition among existing employers - insufficient largely
because of insufficient monetary and financial freedom - want to replace all of
them by a single employer, the State, and expect it to be a moral, benevolent
and efficient one. People! Sometimes they make it very hard to laugh about
them. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 15.
I. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen, (Is more capital
required to create more employment?
- J.Z., 24.5.03.)
in American papers or in
statistics of American origin, I do sometimes read calculations like the
following:
In the industry X the capital invested amounts to A Dollars
and the number of hands employed in it is B. The capital invested per hand,
therefore, amounts in the average to A : B. To create new jobs in that industry
would, therefore, require a fresh investment of A:B Dollars per job. Similar
calculations are sometimes made for the whole country, so that providing the
people with employment seems to be an expensive affair.
The numerical part
may be right, but the consequences drawn from the numbers are erroneous.
(J.Z.: The flaw in these calculations can be seen already by
a simple thought-example: If, in all industries where this is possible, and so
far only one shift is worked, daily, on weekdays, suddenly shift work would be
introduced, and even on weekend 3 shifts were worked as well, for volunteers,
then the same machines and buildings could serve many more employees as
productive capital - apart from extra running cost and repairs - without any
additional capital investments being required. Moreover, most equipment is not fully
used most of the time. Nevertheless, many of the Austrian School seem to still
believe that only a multiplication of capital investments could
provide more jobs. Indeed, in the long run, more capital investments
would be required for many more future jobs. But before and after a
crisis, one with many sales difficulties for goods, services and labour,
largely the same productive capital exists. Only its utilisation rate is
different during the crisis. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
We know, that in a
country where Free Banking is permitted and in use, there will exist no
other unemployment than that by old age, sickness and similar reasons, which
have nothing to do with a crisis, with capital investment and other economic
aspects. If Free Banking were introduced in a country which now suffers from
unemployment, say Germany, some days later the last unemployed would have got a
job, excepting only those, who by causes within their personal circumstances,
are prevented from working. In your book you explained the connections and went
so far as to assert, that under a Free Banking condition the demand for labour
must continually surpass the supply of it, so that, by the consequent rising of
wages and other labour income that part of national production which Karl Marx called
"Mehrwert" (Surplus Value), would quickly be transferred to the
labouring class. To people not trained in the Free Banking System ideas, that
is a result which, at first sight, will seem strange to them
and they will hardly believe it. A result not attained by
the most bloody social revolution and a dictatorship now embracing all spheres
of economical and personal life in Russia. (The worker's share in the social
product is for Russia estimated, by Russian (Non-Soviet) economists as about 20
%, the same as the share of the French peasants in the agrarian output of
France before the French Revolution. The waste introduced by
"planning" comes to 40% and the government's share is 40%, too.), and
such a result should be attainable by simply repealing a bad law and using the
then opened-up banking possibilities???? Impossible - - they say, but by
studying your book one must be convinced that such a result is not only
possible but unavoidable.
Now applied to Germany: The returning of the unemployed
(refugees included) to production through Free Banking would be the task for a
very short time, much shorter than would be required to save up or attract and
invest fresh capital. If that is admitted (and it must be admitted) then the
consequence drawn by some American economists from their investment statistics
must be erroneous in some respects. Where lies their fault in logic? In the light
of Free Banking theory it is easily detected: The inverse of that, what the
American economists say is true:
It's not so that
creating jobs requires fresh capital; it is rather so, that creating jobs
immediately provides a fresh capital. (Stressed by me. - J.Z.)
If it were true, that for every worker, to employ him, in
the average an amount of 2,000 dollars would be required, of the national
capital, then the creation of new jobs would have created, per new job, an
additional capital of 2,000 Dollars or so.
(J.Z.: B.'s English in the last two paragraphs was terrible.
I rewrote what seemed necessary to me. Sometimes his English writing is quite
fluent and on other occasions it is barely comprehensible pidgin or pigeon
English, as he sometimes admitted himself. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
Technically the transmission of the unemployed to production
will be performed in the usual way: Instead of one shift there are performed
two or three. (When sales are assured through free banking then production can
be rapidly expanded, by a higher usage rate of the workforce, machines,
factories and raw materials etc. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Spinning and weaving mills in Germany work now 8 hours a
day. Before the war many worked 24 hours in three shifts. They could do so also
today, if they would be permitted to clothe the population. That is,
indirectly, prohibited by the present money and banking system, which also
blocks the peoples' purchasing power and restricts it to the small amount which
the Central Bank's president is now able to grant.
A statistics made
up after the introducing and use of Free Banking in Germany, would show a
considerable increase of capital employed in industry and agriculture per hand
employed. The average employer, "not sicklied o'er with the pale cast of
thought" will say: That's quite natural. A factory used 24 hours a day can
be sold at a much higher price than a factory used 8 hours or at a standstill.
It would be a great error to think that the freshly appearing capital would be
created by saving or credit. It results from the abolition of unemployment,
without requiring an additional economic action.
Free Banking is now
prohibited in Germany - by harsh punishments. Modern monetary theory, as
created and taught in all countries after the outbreak of the first world war,
by the then writing and teaching economists (their intention was to justify war
financing by the printing notes that were given the cours forcé) - - prevails
in Germany no less than in any other country, Tibet honourably excluded, if the
information received from Lhasa is true.
If Free Banking
were permitted in Germany and Free Trade as well, then Germany could easily
renounce the Marshall Plan Aid and such
things.
By a reform of the Bill of Exchange-Technique, that flows
immediately from the Free Banking theory, export from Germany (first of all to
repay the present debts) could be performed in a way that the importing
countries would not loose a single hour
of employment by these imports.
The honour to have discovered these possibilities must be
ascribed to professor Edgard Milhaud in Geneva. I wrote to you previously about this
possibility.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 21.
I. 1950.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
the second blockade of
Berlin has begun. Your papers will have reported details. Formally the
Americans seem to be in the wrong. An honourable retreat would consist in
submitting the matter to the Arbitration Committee (or whatever its name may
be) of the UN. As average persons ("leaders"! - J.Z.), as are
involved here will, very probably, not listen if anyone offers such a proposition.
It is as Bismarck said in one of his speeches: Average statesmen
are much more easily and, consequently, much more frequently, engaged in wars
than are statesmen with what the Germane call "Format" (or Kaliber -
J.Z.) (literally translated: "size", the meaning is: They are more
lead by the events than leading them.)
As long as the
matter is not yet settled, letters to Berlin, and especially those of foreign
origin, are in danger of being taken by the Russians. (The Soviets! The
Russians & other ethnic etc. people of their empire have no interest in
letters received by Germans! - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Would it take too much trouble to sent your letters and the
next issue of the "Individualist" by air mail????? That creates no
guaranty that letters escape the Russians but a probability of more than 50 %.
(I am convinced that many employees of the German Post are bribed by the
Russians and arrange also for such mail to be sent through the Russian Zone,
which honest employees would send by air.
------------------
A historian should
compile a catalogue of those wars in the last 50 years which were simply begun
by subordinate generals, colonels and such people, so that the government then
believed it must follow-up their actions. The last war between China and
Japan was begun by the commander of the 19th Chinese army at Peking.
It killed more men and destroyed more towns than the 30-years war in Europe.
The war some years before was begun by a Japanese colonel. The Commune of Paris
was begun by some soldiers. Here an American Commander of relatively low rank
began the quarrel, whose consequences, at the moment can not yet be foreseen.
-----------------
I am now in a
little hurry.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
26.
I. 1950
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I had expected that the post would bring to you every day
some baskets full of letters from Scotland and invitations from at least
ten cities to deliver there lectures about Free Banking and the thereby given
possibilities to create, for individuals and their groups, independence from a
central government.
(J.Z.:How would the world look like now, if many
people reacted thus upon hearing or reading good ideas that are new to them?
Such a result can only be achieved once, 1. full experimental freedom has been
introduced and 2. a proper market for new ideas has been established. - J.Z.,
19.2.03.)
I have come to feel that my hopes were exaggerated. Tant pis
pour eux.
-----------------
(Protectionism & "overpopulation".
- J.Z.)
News from all parts of the world that the abundance
of victuals threatens the stability of all economic and moral conditions.
Germany is no exception. The federal minister for food supply.
"Professor" Niklas, explained the surprising offers of
victuals in Germany, domestic and foreign. He demanded "protection"
for German Agriculture from foreign victuals. So that you may not believe me to
be a base calumniator, I include here a cutting from the "Telegraf"
of 20. I. 1950, where the Professor's standpoint is reported. You will
say: It seems that the German mind wants blockades and when
others are getting tired of blockading Germany, then it blockades itself.
At the moment I can't reply. But I'll look at the last
issues of the Malthusian and try to find there arguments that the new
(and world-wide) protectionist mentality (protecting us from abundant food
supplies! - J.Z., 18.2.03) must be somehow wrong. The Professor's opinion is
merely a special case.
-------------------
I had the great pleasure to receive the 24-th
a.) 6 copies of the "Individualist" and 3 copies
of your portrait. Many thanks!
b.) Jan./Febr. issue of the Vaccination Inquirer and Health
Review.
A funny problem, that vaccination problem. The general
opinion here is, that in the past years vaccinations of adults contributed much
to keep mortality relatively low, and my own impression is that it did. A proof
is not yet supplied and perhaps a proof that is sufficient, from a statistical
standpoint, is here impossible. One must examine whether the troubles caused by
vaccination do outweigh the beneficent effects. If, for instance, the life of
only one average individual would be saved by the vaccination of a
million, then I would say that the trouble is too great. But if, by
vaccination, more than 5,000 average individuals would be kept alive, in the 12
months after the vaccination, all of whom would have died, without the
vaccination, in those 12 months, then I would say that the vaccination was
worthwhile and even that a government had, in such a situation, the right to
enforce vaccination.
One of the USA
presidents (Buchanan???) said, when the question of a legal indemnity arose, for widows, whose
husbands were killed in railway accidents: For the first time in the
USA-history we have here to do with the problem of valuing the life of a free
citizen in dollars. Our feelings are against the valuing of a free citizen's
life in dollars. But one has to consider that the dollar value of a life cannot
be otherwise estimated than by a multiple of what an average citizen's labour
is worth per day or per year. It could also be estimated immediately in labour
hours. But a labour hour is worth a fraction of a Dollar.
The President
added, that railway companies could be compelled by law to do more to prevent
accidents. But, he said, an estimation of what could be demanded from them,
would also be an estimation of a citizen's money value. If the law values a
citizen's life at - - say - - 10,000 Dollars and statistics show, that, in the
average, the railway caused 4 deaths by accidents, per annum, and it seemed
possible to reduce that number to 2 deaths, by improvements requiring an
expenditure of 10,000 Dollars annually, then the railway would probably spend
these 10,000 Dollars. But if the value of a free citizen's life would be
estimated like the value of a slave, that is, at about 1,000 Dollars, then the
railway would - - the thing considered merely economically - - probably prefer
to pay the legal indemnity and introduce no such safety improvements. It must
also be taken into consideration that railways are only able to spend a
relatively small percentage of their receipts for safety-improvements. If the
law were to burden the railways with too great indemnities, then it could bring
the whole business to a standstill. (I heard that, at
the time before the Dollar devaluation, the legal indemnity in the USA was
5,000 Dollars. It may still stand at that nominal amount.)
Similar
considerations may be applied to the vaccination problem, although such
considerations would not exhaust the problem.
If, in a community
of 1 million inhabitants, the expenses for a vaccination would be (say) 100,000
Dollars, and it could be expected that the life of 20 individuals, each valued
at 5,000 Dollars, would be saved or more, then the compulsory vaccination would
seem not unjustified. (The expenses of the inhabitants by waiting at the
vaccination station, other losses of time and such trouble must also be
considered.)
How to estimate a
life's value in discussing the vaccination problem?
In saving
aeroplanes, ships, people buried by earthquakes, etc. regularly much more is
spent than 100,000 dollars per person, if necessary.
In wars it costs -
- as I calculated some years ago - - about 30 kilograms of gold to
"produce" one dead, a number remarkably constant since the
time of Napoleon I, and observed in the Prussian-Danish war of 1964 as well as
during the first world war and in other wars.
(J.Z.: Desertion: That amount suggests already the
possibility of avoiding the killing of a person by bribing him to come over or
to at least to consider the possibility of other kinds of settlements than
mutual slaughter attempts. To buy the services of the generals on the other
side might often be the cheapest option. And if all the people on the other
side were offered, instead of gold, all their individual rights and liberties,
now suppressed by their own government, then a bribe in gold coins might not
even be necessary and corresponding lives and property on the own side might
also be spared. Alas, our rulers and their advisors and public opinion are
still so ignorant and prejudiced, that military "actions" is still
and all too often considered to be the only "solution", with the
economic standpoint being altogether ignored, even when the costs, as in the
coming-up war with Iraq, are estimated, for the USA alone, to amount already to
200 billion dollars! Do not forgive them for what they are doing to you and
others. They do not even know what they are doing - and they are not interested
in rightful and rational alternatives at all! - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
One could also calculate in this way: If a
worker must, for some reason, perform a work that includes an additional
accident risk, so that the probability of a mortal accident is increased by - -
say - - 1 o/oo, if statistically observed for a year, the work concerned
requires an hour's time and the additional wage is 10 cents, then the
contracting parties estimate the man's value (without knowing, that they do
estimate it so) at:
1000 x 8 x 300 x
1/10 = 240,000 Dollars.
Here it is supposed, that the worker works 8 hours a day and
300 days a year. A sum of 240,000 Dollars paid if the worker dies by accident
within a year is - - a probability of 1/1,000 supposed - - 240 Dollars. If the
time is not a year but a fraction of 1/2400 year, that is, an hour, the premium
is 240 : 2400 = 10 cents, the premium here really paid.
I think that in
practice the extra wages for dangerous jobs correspond to an average worker's
life value of about 100,000 Dollars or so. If I would be Berlin's dictator
(they should nominate me), I would suppose, in vaccination calculations, a
Berlin citizen's life to be at least worth 400,000 Marks, which
corresponds to about 100,000 Dollars, in the official quotation.
------------------
c.) "The Economic Digest", January 1950. In the
article "Germany's Economic Chief, Ludwig Erhard - - Philosopher of Free
Trade", several persons are mentioned as now fighting against
"dirigism", e.g. Walter Eucken at Freiburg. That Rittershausen is not
mentioned is unjust. He has done much more in this fight than all others
together.
d.) A cutting from the "Times" of 18.I.1950,
containing a Labour Party Manifesto, "The Second Five Year Plan".
The party - - of course - - learns nothing from history,
also not from that history which passes under the eyes of all.
In East-Germany the ideal of full employment is realised.
The Russians rediscovered the secret known to old Egyptian kings, who achieved
full employment of the people - - sometimes in useful works like the Nile
regulation, sometimes in less useful, as the building of the pyramids. Do not
let an adherent of Piazzi Smith read that. They are all fanatic admirers of the
pyramid builders. I read in a book of the celebrated Brugsch Pascha - -
"Aus dem Morgenlande" - - in what state mathematics was in old Egypt.
Ever since, I can no longer admire the old Egyptians, their kings included. To
find the surface of a quadrangle, they added two sides and took the half of the
sum. Then they multiplied the two half sums. The rule holds good in the case of
rectangular quadrangles, but in the case of - - say - - trapezoids, the error
may become very great. To measure a triangle, they took the smallest side, divided
it by 2 and multiplied it by the half sum of the other sides. From kings that
tolerated such atrocities in their mathematical department one cannot expect
that they will treat man any better. Plutarch reports that the subjects of
Cheops and Chefren swore not to express their names, so that they would be
forgotten to posterity, in spite of they pyramids. But some Greek historian
delivered their names to posterity. That heaven itself finally became
impatient, let frogs rain down and sent other plagues to the country, will be
believed by every mathematician and he would confess, that he, if he
would have had the power, would have done the same. Insofar, the old stories
are quite credible. (Exodus VIII, 2.)
The Egyptians
treated their triangles and quadrangles as in totalitarian States things are
normally treated. This reminds me of the old story (perhaps also known in
England) form tsarist times, when a German general visited his Russian friend.
The Russian showed the German his bee hives. The German marvelled at the
narrowness of the holes by which the bees flew in and out. "That
the bees can pass such a narrow hole!" - "What, said the Russian,
that bee - - he must!!!" (Der Bien muss!")
But to return to
East Germany: There also a mathematical rule is not recognized, namely the
rule: If a pot, filled with wine or simply with water, has been pumped out, the
greatest and severest extortions will not show other results than the very
rule: From no pot more can be pumped out than has been pumped in beforehand.
The Eastern pot is now empty. Until now the taxpayers covered the
deficits of the "Volkseigene Betriebe", that is, of the State-owned
shops, factories etc. Since papers such as The Economist, Truth and others, do
observe the Eastern economy, you will certainly read at the next time what
things happened in the East. Russia seems to be in a similar situation. England
will perhaps come to it by the second Five Year Plan. But, as the English
economy still preserved some fat from the previous capitalist times, when all
goods were plentiful, it may require a third or a fourth Five Years Plan to
ruin her economy completely.
-----------------
In my next letter I
hope to write still something about the Thinker's Digest. The number is
extremely interesting.
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 5. II. 1950. Your letter of 30. I., received 2. II., of
31. I., received 3. II.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
Dr Runge has
published an article on your proposal of Free Banking for Germany, in the daily
"Morgen", which is printed at Mannheim. I think he will send you a
copy. The article is not bad. I wrote to him, that he must now continue and deal with the average man's
doubts. At least once a month an article of Runge should appear. R. has good
connections with the "Morgen", a moral asset of the greatest value.
The Bonn government
will protect the West German agriculture against the possibility that its
products are not sold. The good intention is to be highly praised, but the
means used - - "protective"
duties - - are bad; but they know no
other. Permission to pay for all that peasants want in their own notes (in
practice, the notes of agricultural issuing institutes) would be the right
means and a very good beginning to introduce the principle of free banking in
Germany.
--------------
Your trip to
Germany. And already in next March! I wrote to Runge that he must induce you to
deliver a lecture e at Heidelberg about Free Banking (the word
"Banking" for note-issuing would no longer be understood in Germany,
but that's subordinate). I know that you are no friend of lectures, but here
you must.
Rittershausen will be
extremely glad. I wrote him, too, that he must compel you to deliver a lecture
in Frankfurt, in what milieu he must find out. Rittershausen's address has
again changed and is now: (16) Frankfurt am Main, Eschersheim, Ebereschenweg
71. (Eberesche = mountain ash.)
I beg you to write,
at soon as possible, to the British Information Centre, (1) Berlin-Halensee,
156 Kurfürstendamm and agree with the Centre on a day when you could deliver a
lecture at Berlin. Subject - - perhaps - - "Is there room for Free Note
Issuing Institutes in Berlin? Who could create them?
I do hope that in
March Berlin will not be occupied by the Russians. This second blockade looks
like an introduction to such an occupation. The supply is practically stopped.
I hoard some victuals.
Where will you
lodge in Berlin?
You propose that I
come to Heidelberg. That's impossible for several reasons. The first is, that I
am a poor unemployed (25.40 West-marks a week) and a ticket to Heidelberg is
far beyond my financial horizon. The second is my health is very bad and this
for a long, time. At Potsdam, in 1946, I got a touch of typhoid fever from the
bad water at that time and even now I still suffer from it. Sit venia verbo: I
must always be quite near to a toilet. Also I acquired, some months ago,
something that is hardly an asset: A rupture in the groin. I can no longer move
much. The Winter pressed me hard. My
nature is that of an inhabitant of the tropics. At a temperature when the
normal man begins to unpack his summer clothing (if he has them), I do get
chilblains. But in the greatest heat, when normal people get heat-stroke, I
begin thawing.
-----------------
Be not surprised
that my English for colloquial purposes is zero. If I sit besides English or
American soldiers in the town railway, I understand not one word of their
talks. Also at the radio (BBC), which is often heard in the streets, I
understand nothing.
------------------
(Don't take it for
haughtiness if I compare myself with Proudhon: But when he got a fit of
cholera - - which seems to be a typhoid fever caused by more energetic bacteria
than the usual - - he got for the rest of his life the same condition that I am in now.)
(If medical doctors were much better in curing at least the
great men than they were and possibly still are, then these men would have
served us even better. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
----------------
Paying for
German imports.
1.) If Germany is permitted to pay by bills of exchange of
German origin - - as she did for centuries - - with a face
value in Dollars,
Pounds, Marks, Taels, etc. as the others prefer,
2.) if there is permitted a free market for foreign and
domestic exchanges, as existed here for centuries,
3.) if all officials now occupied with
"controlling" foreign exchange are at once pensioned off (with full
salary),
4.) if the trade in gold bullion will also be free, as was
also the usage for centuries,
then Germany can and will pay for her imports and
the foreign exporters will not be no less satisfied than they were by German
business (which has always been considered as very good) in the year 1913.
If even one of these conditions is not fulfilled,
then there will be troubles, although their true nature, in these blocked
times, will not be found out.
(There are now some astrological monthlies, sold at
every news-stand, where it is "clearly" pointed out that the present
commercial troubles are caused by the stars. Very many do believe that.)
In the charters of
mediaeval commercial guilds was often stated, that the merchant had a legal
right to pay all his debts by clearing at one of the great fairs - -
Lyon - - Cahors - - Leipzig - - and that the magistrate will not admit a suit
against a merchant, in commercial matters, before all possibilities of clearing
were exhausted. I found that in the charter of the merchant guilds of Leipzig.
It was an excellent law and there is really no reason not to revive it. Such a
revival would be nothing than the legalisation of a practice generally
introduced.
(J.Z.: In normal times. In crisis times all too many
creditors claim their legal "right" to demand cash, i.e., precisely
when cash payments have become most difficult to impossible, due to the crisis,
if it is one of a money shortage [currency famine]. Precisely then an extension
of clearing rather than its restriction or by-passing is required - and also
additional "cash" in form of competing private or cooperative
currencies, all, essentially and likewise, based upon the clearing principle. -
J.Z., 19.2.03.)
-----------------
Financing of Industry. (Your letter of 30.I.)
Sometimes it is possible to grant stocks of (presently - J.Z.) unsaleable goods - -
cotton, sugar, perhaps even coffee and tobacco - - as a loan to industry. It
would be better than to throw these goods into the sea, which is now the usual
expedient of "experts". Unsold stocks are capital or may be
transformed into capital but are not savings.
----------------
Inflation.
The elder theory said: Without "Zwangskurs" (cours
forcé) no inflation is possible. (The English "Legal Tender"
covers 9/10 of the notion "Zwangskurs". But legal
tender is also possible if the paper money need not be taken at its face value.
We had that several times in Germany - - "Tresor-Scheine" from 1806
to 1814 - - Paper-mark during the Great Inflation. In a celebrated judgement,
pronounced in November 1923, the Reichsgericht said: Every creditor must accept
the paper-mark, but not at its face value, insofar as the alteration in the
general price level must be taken into
consideration. If - - say - - a man had borrowed 10,000 paper-marks in May
1922, then it would be unjust if the debtor would compel the creditor to be
content with 100,000 paper-marks in May 1923. The debtor must pay more
but has the right to use the paper-mark as a means of payment. Insofar the
paper-mark is legal tender but has no "Zwangskurs". The now
existing monetary laws of Western Germany expressly say: Any clause is
prohibited from taking care of a real or possible or asserted diminution of the
present paper-mark's value. That is the real cours forcé.)
(J.Z.: There are many forms of legal tender. I tried to list
some but not all of them at the end of my essay on legal tender, which can be
found in the appendix to my main website. The 2 major distinctions which B.
here mainly discussed is that between money with compulsory value and money
with compulsory acceptance. (Zwangswert und Annahmezwang.) A systematic study
of all the forms that occurred historically, in all the countries that bothered
to introduce such legal fictions and wrongs, would come close to be able to
list all the various forms and could indicate, for all these countries, when
they were applied and what the consequences were, in each case. Maybe such a
study, a worthy subject for a doctor dissertation, would be the best evidence
for the close and causal connection between various forms of legal tender,
over-issues and inflationary rises of price levels, caused from the monetary
side. So far this link is ignored in the vast majority of all economic
textbooks. - J.Z., 19.2.03.
Why is no inflation
possible without cours forcé? It is not possible because the people - - at
first businessmen - - refuse paper-money which is suspected of being into
circulation by an over-emission. If the money's value is in a close relation to
a real value - - gold (bullion), silver, other metals (tin in Yünan), corn,
etc. - - then the over-issue is easily indicated: At the market the paper-money
gets a discount. And paper-money, subject to a discount is, refused by
employees and in most stores. It is not quite unfit as a means of payment but,
generally, it is no longer fit to serve as a universal means of payment. Then
firms and sometimes even banks issue certificates to be accepted by themselves
at their face value. (In Germany during the Great Inflation, although the laws
prohibited such self-help issues.)
This matter is more
difficult if the face value is not in relation to a single and real commodity,
as is now the case in nearly all (or in all) countries of the world. The words
"Pound", "Franc", "Mark", express no real value.
A single man, President of the Issue-Monopoly-Institute, or a minister, does,
from time to time "regulate" the commercial value of his paper money
(while he and the law pretend that it is "our" money! - J.Z.,
19.2.03) or tries to. Then, in practice, the effect of his "measures"
is zero. If he has increased the quantity, the value sinks and prices rise.
Even if an angel from heaven would be in the place of the president, the result
would be the same. But there is always a "black" market for foreign
exchange, and at this market the depreciation is to be observed. If
there would be no cours forcé, then the people would refuse the suspected
money. But in practice there is a cours forcé.
If the depreciation is not caused by an
over-emission then always the same happens: All debtors procure for themselves
depreciated money (buy it or borrow it) and pay with it to their creditors what
they owe. Especially the tax authorities get suddenly all back taxes paid. In
other words: As long as the discount persists, there arises a demand for the
temporarily depreciated paper-money. By that demand its value is soon is
restored. In the 19th
century that has often happened in Germany, where there was
no "black" market for paper money but an official market at the
exchanges, the greatest of such markets being established at Frankfurt am Main.
Paper money had no cours forcé in Germany, except for a short period during the
Napoleonic years and in some Thuringian little States, which were of no
economical importance. Prussia conducted her wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870
without cours forcé.
When during the
first days of the 1870 war the Prussian notes got a discount of 10 % at the
open market, the president of Prussian State Bank made known to all debtors of
the Bank (in practice all merchants) that, if they would not accept the notes
at par, then he would never again discount one bill signed by them. He added,
that the acceptance at par did not injure them, because the Prussian Bank
accepted, from the merchants, the amount of their debts in these notes, too,
and this at par. In a few days the discount of the Prussian notes disappeared.
Wherever no cours
forcé is imposed, the greatest and most unwise over-emission cannot produce a
real inflation, i.e., one with an increasing general price level.
(Unless a deflation policy follows, these nominal price
increases, reckoned in the inflated money, are permanent. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Notes get a discount -
- that's all. (And the minister of finance gets a reprimand from the
ruler - - as was really the case in old Prussia. The last emperor seems to have
been the first Prussian ruler who understood nothing of cours forcé and other
monetary affairs.)
(He seemed to have had little understanding of justice, just
war-aims and just warfare methods and of international trade as well, and
still, my grandfather, who fathered my anarchist father Kurt Zube, still loved
the monarchy! Under it, for most of the time and most people, a relative peace
had reigned for more than a century. It was ascribed to monarchism rather than
to other factors. - J.Z., 18.2.03.)
It is interesting
to study in elder financial writings how over-emission worked when there was no
cours forcé. The new theory - - upheld
for war purposes in 1914 and after - - that inflation may be produced by other
causes than over-emission in connection with the cours forcé, say, by the
balance of trade (which was the general view among the (mentally - J.Z.)
blocked professors in Germany), by exaggerated wages, by exaggerated profits of
employers or merchants, by insufficient savings, by insufficient production, by
too much consumption, etc., etc.,
this theory has nothing to do with truth. The mentioned
factors may produce a (temporary! - J.Z.) rising of prices, but, although
Keynes and (almost! - J.Z.) all others confounded it, rising of prices and inflation
are quite different things and declining prices and deflation are no
less quite different things.
(J.Z.: Seeing the
patience with which real scientists, like Robert Koch, proceeded, he, who
undertook about 2,000 experiments before he finally found what he was seeking,
the microbe causing tuberculosis, one should imagine that the ten-thousands of
"economists" in the world would have managed, by now, at least
between them, to closely examine all the supposed "causes" and
"definitions" of inflation and deflation and all the features of the
actual events of inflations and deflations, including their legal
pre-conditions, to come to a scientifically tenable and provable view on all of
them. Instead, most of them continue to subscribe to one or the other popular
myth, error or prejudice on the subject - and so far these have been too numerous
to be counted - and no one seems to have listed them all. At least the
beginnings of such surveys could be placed on the Internet, with the standing
invitation to help complete them. - Failure to do so has led us, directly or
indirectly, to most of the wars, civil wars, revolutions, mass murders and
oppressions of the 20th century - and may lead us into another dark
century. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Inflation is
over-issue of paper-money in connection with cours forcé. (And the issue
monopoly! If it is the only money then one has to accept it - and price one's
goods and labour accordingly. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Deflation is a
contraction of paper-money, so that the normal trade is in want of means of
payment, in connection with a monopoly for paper-money.
These two factors:
Cours forcé and note-issue monopoly are to be sharply separated from other
factors (good or bad) influencing prices.
The elder theory (especially also in Germany) was well
informed on this.
Rittershausen (I do
not speak of myself - - having hardly any possibility to print anything) is now
the sole economist in Germany, who upholds the elder theory.
(J.Z.: Nevertheless, Hayek managed to call Rittershausen an
inflationist! That Beckerath was unable to publish anything in print on
monetary matters, after WW II, to his death - with perhaps the exception of a
single article on the financing of housing, in an obscure journal - and his
writings in my even more obscure PEACE PLANS series, does not say much for
freedom of press opportunities for poor people like him, who have not yet
explored e.g. their microfilm self-publishing options. Now they and all others
have e.g., floppy disk, e-mail, CD-ROM and website options - and still all too
many, I believe most, of the important freedom writings remain unpublished or
out of print and untranslated! Even Meulen, committed to his own notions on
"Free Banking" did not sufficiently open his pages to the much more
radical monetary freedom views of Ulrich von Beckerath and managed to destroy
the correspondence with B. and all others, under the wrong assumption that
everything important in it had already found its way into his "The
Individualist". - Oh the self-delusions of even very intelligent and
creative people! - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Runge's method to
lower the price level by demanding taxes in notes cannot produce any good: I
wrote him about that today. Runge confounds here the possibilities of reducing
a discount of notes (price of notes in precious metal) with the possibilities of reducing
the whole price level.
In Prussia, in the
year 1815, a law was introduced (before that it was already introduced in
Saxonia) that a part of the taxes (if I remember well, 1/2) must be paid
in paper-money, and that for each Thaler paid in silver, instead of in paper, a
fine of one "Silbergroschen", at that time 1/30th Thaler,
later 1/24th Thaler, must be paid. After some time this law was no
longer applied because even without that measure the quotation of Prussian
paper-money was always at par.
----------------
In the reports of
the famous Guernsey Market Scheme - - as far as I could get reports - -
it is not mentioned whether the Guernsey notes were ever at a discount. It was
also not mentioned whether there were taxes in arrears. If a great part of the taxes where in
arrears, then a fresh issue of local notes had to enable many or all tax payers
to then pay taxes in arrears and the notes thus remained at par.
The little town Wörgl
in Tyrol (about 4,000 inhabitants), 20 years ago, proceeded in the same manner
as the Guernsey scheme, until the Central Bank of Austria prohibited it. Many
persons collected the notes and so helped to finance Wörgl. I dealt with the
matter in my dissertation "Must Providing Employment Cost Money?"
-----------------
I do not believe
that the price level in Guernsey rose as a consequence of the note issue.
Such an effect can only take place when before the note issue there was a
serious deflation, in which creditors, including tax collectors, demanded their
money in spite of the general want of it. In such a condition prices must
decrease because every debtor sells his goods (fast and at emergency sales
prices - J.Z., 19.2.03), to get money for his creditors. An issue of notes does
then remove deflation and restores the price level to its normal level. That
has nothing to do with inflation. In the old reports these circumstances - - as
far as I know - - are not dealt with.
-----------------
I did not yet
answer your letter of 24.I. I will recover in the next days and beg also to
speak about some points of your above-mentioned letters not treated today.
-----------------
Very faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 9.
II. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
In a former letter
I proposed for coins to stamp on every coin the diameter, the thickness,
the net weight, the gross weight and the fineness of the precious metal used.
From a dissertation: "Die Weltgeld-Idee bis zur Franzoesischen
Revolution", by Lucia Dressel, Berlin, 1930, I learn that Gasparo Regiano Scaruffi,
in a book printed in 1582 ("L'Alitinonfo") demanded the same in
connection with propositions for an international coin. Important ideas very
rarely arise only in one head, as may also be seen from the
"Simultaneous Discovery" of Lancelot L. White, reprinted in Thinker's
Digest, Winter 1949.
--------------
The quoted issue of
Thinker's Digest contains an article: "What Is Personalism?" by J. B.
Coates. The author treats the publications of several personalists,
inter alia Mounier's "Personalist Manifesto" (in French). All
personalists are not aware that the right to issue standardised bonds is a
right of every person, no less so than the right to freely express one's
opinions. The author, Coates, is somewhat surprised that in a later
publication: "Qu'est ce que le personalism" Mounier approached
Marxism. I am not surprised. A man may be a defender of liberty so
sincerely and ardent as any - - if he neglects that fundamental right, then he
is lead, logically and unavoidably, to totalitarianism.
-------------
I do regret that
the English language does not possess a word equal to the German "Steuerfundation"
(literally: "tax-foundation" - J.Z., 19.2.03.), firstly used by
Lorenz von Stein, an excellent Austrian economist, in general use for some
decades and today forgotten. Only Rittershausen continues to use it.
"Steuerfundation" means: Covering the paper-money not by a stock of
gold, but by accepting the paper-money at par for taxes. The thing was quite
known to W. B. Greene, who speaks about it in "Mutual Banking" and
mentions the example of State notes of North Carolina, which for an amount of
400,000 - 500,000 dollars circulated at par with gold and silver, although - -
he says - - the sole advantage of the notes was their use as a means of payment
to pay State taxes. The revenue of North Carolina at that time was less than
100,000 dollars per annum.
(J.Z.: In English this possibility is somewhat indicated
e.g., by the term and use of "fiduciary money" and even a bit by
"fiat money" but these terms are, usually, not properly defined and
shown in their limitations, with a distinction between this money as an
exchange medium, an exclusive one, and its paper value standard, and the
compulsory acceptance of it as an exchange medium and its compulsory value as a
value standard. Nor is it clearly indicated that, while in general circulation
a tax-foundation money should be freely rated, i.e., remain refusable and
discountable, the issuing centre and the tax authorities should always have to
accept it at its face value, seeing that they are their own IOUs. Without sound
tax-foundation and as monopoly money, such notes amount, as someonce said, to
mere standardised "requisitioning certificates". The gold redemption
fanatics usually become aware only of the fact that tax foundation money is
usually not redeemable by the issuer in gold coins upon demand and thus they
declare such money to be merely "fiat money", i.e., as having no
foundation at all but the acceptance command. Consequently, much confusion
remains even among those who somewhat talk about "fiduciary" issues
of paper money or of "fiat money" by the State. Tax-foundation money
using a sound value standard and without compulsory acceptance and compulsory
value in general circulation and not being an exclusive currency - can be quite
sound, as far as anything that is based on compulsory taxation can be sound.
One can envision it also as a subscription money under voluntary taxation,
within exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities. As such it could not
only be very useful but could also be quite rightful for their voluntary
members. - Towards foreign nations or payment communities no currency has ever
full "legal tender" powers, no matter how much governments try to give
them some such powers by special treaties, e.g., fixing their exchange rate and
otherwise attempting to control the us of foreign exchange. During severe
deflations and inflations the governmental monetary despotism tends also to
find its limits in degrees of effective popular resistance against its
commands, e.g. by the issue of gold-weight value notes and other emergency
money issues. - For every book advocating at least degrees of monetary freedom
there are, probably, a thousand if not several thousand which do take monetary
despotism for granted. - That as fundamental aspects of every somewhat advanced
economy remain still as little discussed and, therefore, as little clarified,
in most minds, even that of famous economists, is one of the many and great
scandals of our times - about which those mass media, dealing mainly with
scandals, have nothing intelligent to say. -
J.Z., 24.5.03.)
Lorenz von Stein estimated that a quantity of State notes,
not surpassing about 1/4 to 1/3 of the annual receipts, would be covered by
that "Steuerfundation" as well as by a stock of gold coins.
Steuerfundation is
the cover of notes by due but not yet paid taxes. If the amount of State notes
does not surpass the due taxes (not those due in a year or later). The note is
in reality a clearing-cheque that exchanges tax receipts for goods and
services.
Steuart
says: It is the State's duty to keep his citizens able to pay the taxes by
issuing a sufficient quantity of State notes. This doctrine can be generalised:
Everybody, who
expects payments is morally obliged to buy the things he wants by freshly
issued notes (issued by himself or by a community to which he economically
belongs, the community may also be the clientele of a banker), which he is
ready to accept at par, when he gets his payment.
The old rule
was:
Firstly provide money, then
buy.
The new and
right rule must be:
Firstly buy with freshly
issued notes and then call in your outstanding debts, accepting the freshly
issued
notes as a means of
payment.
Every man should be in
the position of a creditor.
(J.Z.: The last sentence is written as B. added it. Its
meaning in this connection escapes me. We are all alternatively or
simultaneously creditors and debtors, have incomes we are entitled to and spend
them for what we buy. -
I would rather say: Every man should be in the position of
an issuer and an acceptor of notes. Perhaps that is what B. meant to say but
sometimes the typing fingers get the wrong signal and B., obviously, did not do
close proof-reading, either, for lack of time or energy. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
Very
faithfully yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
(Postscriptum, on the
reverse. - J.Z.)
The old rule was at
its place as long as coins were the main means of payment. It could be
taken as good as notes were believed to be money-orders. It is no longer
good there, where clearing is the normal form for commercial
inter-communication. Here coins are an "Ersatz" for notes. In the old
view notes are an "Ersatz" for coins. The old view does no longer
hold good.
Signed: Bth.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U. v. Beckerath, …
9. II. 50.
Your letter of 4. II., received 8. II. 50.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
Before the Fuchs-Trial everybody would have said: Such
things are impossible in England. Perhaps still more is possible there. Let me
direct your attention to the following facts:
1.) During the blockade it was impossible to get 5 tons
daily reserved for postal purposes among the more than 6,000 tons daily
transported by the air-lift, except during the last days of the blockade. All
letters to Berlin - - if they were not marked as "Durch Luftpost"
(Via Airmail - J.Z.) were sent by railway, which practically meant: The
Russians could read them if they liked. Letters from London were, in every case
(as I learnt from you) sent by railway, even if marked by "By
air-mail".
2.) From time to time it is observed at the German station Hof
in Bavaria, that transports of letters pass Hof and from there go through the
Russian Zone. The letters, take the same route as if they had been sent at
normal times. But at present that should not be the point of view. Letter
senders from one town of the Bi-Zone to another trust that their letters are
not sent so that they pass through the Russian Zone. The German post does not
care about that. (Or may be, it made sure that they do? After all, the post
office is an ancient State-socialist institution and its managers and employees
have, mostly, a corresponding mentality. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
3.) Also now, although there is opportunity enough to send
letters directly from England to Berlin by aeroplanes and, vice versa, from
Berlin to England, it is not permitted, and this fact is not published in
England. All must pass the Russian Zone.
------------------
I regret that a man
like de Courcy did not yet get information about these facts. He has probably
knowledge of other facts which, in
connection with the above-mentioned ones, would give rise to some suspicions.
4.) Your military visa. Although it is not your intention to
visit the Russian Zone and would avoid every passing of that Zone by travelling
in an aeroplane, a Russian Visa is required. By Visa the Russians know that you
visited Berlin. By that procedure they also know of all the other visitors.
----------------
In Western Germany
about 3 % of the voters are pro-communists. Among the postal officials the
percentage will be about the same. (At least! The trade union mentality among
these "public servants" is usually very strong and has the usual
limitations and preferences. - J.Z., 24.5.03.) One can guess that among 100
pro-communists there is at least one activist, who, with the help of
some money and bacon-parcels does all what the communist leaders demand.
----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, …
10.
II. 50.
Dear Mr. Meulen,
on February 6th
I received by your kindness:
1.) Economist, 21. I. 50,
2.) Truth, 27. I. 50,
3.) The Scots Independent, January 1950,
4.) City Press, 6.I., 13.I. 1950,
5.) The Weekly Register, No. 1 and 2., 1950.
---------------------
The Scots
Independent contains in every line the contrary of what it should
contain if Mr. Gibson would have fully appreciated your article. Mr.
Gibson is not aware: That party wins which controls the country's means of
payment. The London government controls them now and - - that is the point
- - Mr. Gibson and his adherents don't have the ambition to bestow the control
to the Scottish people, that means, in this case, to every Scot who thinks
himself able and desires contributing to supply Scotland with means of payment
- - just as it was in the times of Adam
Smith. The occasion for Mr. Gibson was unique. He could have become, for
Scotland, what in Chinese old mystical history Yao and Shun were for China.
His movement is now
much less serious than that of some African tribes which try to get
"independence", the word taken in an African sense. From
"Truth" I see that the leaders already entered into communication with
Moscow. That the Dr. Kwame Nkruma has been arrested helps the new movement more
than it checks it.
Weekly-Register.
That's an astonishing paper. Cobbet Tradition - - a very good thing!!!
But what I miss, that is an article - -
pro or con - - about the individual's right to offer everyone his goods
or his labour or his claims - in form of bonds (cheques, etc.), standardised
like money is and to accept such bonds from others.
The article "Devaluation" by S. Sagar, Nr. 1, page
6, speaks of several important things but not of devaluation. My impression is:
The author understands nothing of that part of monetary theory, which a
follower of Cobbet should understand and fully understand!
"Was nicht ist kann werden!" is the German saying. (What isn't may become!
- J.Z.)
----------------------
If Truth
would discuss the above stated question, it would stand at the first place of
all papers in the world. In no other paper - - the "Individualist"
excluded - - have I found more good old common sense.
----------------------
Here included a
little collection of definitions of inflation. (See below! - J.Z.)
That English
economic science does represent inflation in such a false light and that the
English economic language does not possess a word exactly corresponding to the
German "Zwangskurs" or the French "Cours forcé"
is a real disaster.
(In Germany the term exists but its meaning and consequence
are not comprehended, either! - J.Z., 19.2.03.) ("Legal Tender" means
"Annahmezwang" in German and "Cours légal" in
French. About 15 years ago I could state that in a correspondence with the
professor Buriot-Darseiles at Moulins (Charente inférieure), an excellent man
and one who wrote German at least as well as I do.
The right
definition of inflation was often expressed in the years from 1919 - 1923:
Inflation is the
creating of fiat money (that is money endowed with cours forcé) without
imposing, at the same time, and for the same amount, taxes on that part of the
community receiving directly or indirectly the fiat money, whereby it may be
expected that the taxes are paid with the fiat money.
(Put into bold letters
by me. - J.Z.)
Jevons, who,
in his "Theory of Political Economy", gave the notion of a Trading
Body ("Handelskoerper"), would perhaps have said:
Inflation means buying
with newly created fiat money from a trading body without taxing that trading
body for an equal amount, the taxes being payable or expected to be paid in
fiat money and without delay. (Put in bold letters by me. - J.Z.)
So defined an
inflation-free issue of paper-money is a clearing between the government and
the taxpayer and also a clearing between the government (the buyer) and the
owners of the bought goods and, further, a clearing between the owners of goods
(they sell not all to the government) and other owners of other goods.
At no stage of the
circulation process arises a granting of a loan to the government,
although the usual (and false) notion is that every issue of a paper money is a
loan which the government raised from the public and for the issued amount. The
whole process remains a clearing between the owners of goods. The
government, in the here considered case, is an owner, too. Its goods are the
tax receipts. That the tax receipts are not voluntarily bought is not
essential. (In this context. Their sale is rather enforced and thus assured. -
J.Z., 19.2.03.)
If taxation remains
behind the issue of paper-money, then that part of the purchasing power, which
corresponds to the difference of freshly issued money and new imposed taxes,
payable without delay, is directed to other goods than tax receipts and thus
increases the prices of these goods.
If, at the time
when the paper money is issued, there exists a tendency of sinking prices, that
tendency is diminished by issuing paper-money in a smaller (Usually, in a real
deflation case: "larger"! But here he seems to discuss a special
case. - J.Z., 19.2.03.) amount than is "covered" by newly imposed and
due taxes. (Not taxes due in a year or so.)
The effect may be that prices, in spite of inflation, continue sinking,
although less than they would have sunk without the inflation. It is admitted,
that there are few examples for this, but they do exist. That's important,
insofar as the generally supposed symptom of real inflation, that is, an
increase of the price level, must not necessarily be the consequence of
inflation. In the years 1920 and 1921 it happened in Germany, several times,
that the government issued fresh notes to prevent the general price level from
sinking. And, really, the government kept the price level pretty stable (for
several months).
(J.Z.: Then and there the inflated prices may have sunk only
from excess prices, that had been racing ahead of the actual note printing, in
expectation of a fast further inflation, down towards those prices, which
actually would correspond to the existing note circulation. Issuing then notes
to prevent that sinking of the price level meant, in effect, further inflation
up to the level of the exaggerated prices and "stabilising" the price
level there! - Anyhow, that is how I understand that phenomenon and
relationship at present. Has anyone a better explanation? - Incredible as it
sounds to us, there were then still people hoarding the inflated paper money.
Beckerath, in one of his railway travels at the time, he did not give me year
and month, encountered a well-dressed gentleman with several very heavy
suitcases. They came to talk and B. gained the man's confidence. That man was
actually a mayor of one of the larger cities of Germany. Maybe Goerlitz.
Finally that gentleman told B. in confidence: See these suitcases: They are
full of paper money printed in previous years. I do know, that together with
all the freshly printed paper money, they have very much fallen in value. But,
one day, they will rise again! And then I will be a very rich man! - It is not
impossible that this was not a very exceptional case. In periods when this
inflation slowed down, as it did, sometimes, for a while, many others may have
shared his opinion and might have similarly hoarded notes, which would have had
a deflationary effect upon the price level. One thing is certain: The minds of
most people, even of "experts", were then and there very much
confused on the whole subject. Even now they are. Many held then that
"foreign speculators" drove down the value of the paper-Mark. So, as "good
Germans", these people may have attempted to speculate upon its rise,
"supporting the German Mark", by holding on to many of these notes
and hoping to profit thereby. In times of wars, revolutions, inflations and
deflations many people are quite capable of quite irrational thoughts and
actions. - J.Z., 19.2.03.)
If the issued paper
money is not endowed with cours forcé, then things go in a different way.
Businessmen observe the influx of fresh notes and observe it before others
observe it as well. They are not so blocked as not to know what that influx
means and so try to get other means of payment than domestic notes. First they
ask for gold money or notes at par with gold or at a stable value relation to
gold. But that does not remain secret. In a few days the whole people knows: a
part of us expects a depreciation of the notes. Effect: The acceptance of the
notes is widely refused.
If then the
government imposes new taxes or increases the previously imposed ones, the
taxpayers buy at the exchange notes for (say) 90% and on the next day they pay
their taxes. At the counter of the tax offices the notes are taken at par, so
that the taxpayer wins 1/9th.
By the now arising demand the value of the notes rises quickly and in a
few days parity or the old note value is restored (in general circulation -
J.Z.).
In all cases the public ascribes that to an increasing trust
in the government, although the increase in value is the natural effect of the
increased demand. But the cases where notes without a cours forcé were issued are
rare and all happened many decades ago. That should not prevent scientific
economists from always distinguishing notes endowed with cours forcé from those
without it.
Hammering into the
heads: "Inflation is impossible without cours forcé!"- must be
the next step after some economists are convinced. (Bold lettering by me. -
J.Z.)
As long as people
sincerely believe: "Inflation is also possible without cours forcé and
merely by over-issue, then Free Banking is psychologically impossible. The
general opinion is then like this:
For private bankers
and other private issuers there exists always a temptation to issue to excess.
How can one control them and stop the issues at the right moment? That
is practically impossible. This admitted, a money-monopoly of the State is,
obviously, the lesser evil.
I think you will
have heard this objection as often as I heard it. There is only one
possibility to answer it successfully: State the truth, that in the absence of
cours forcé there exists an automatism in every system of issue that checks
inflation at the right moment (really moment, and certainly at the right
day), and that the liberty to evaluate notes (by refusals or discounts!
- J.Z.) is that automatism. And then give examples, always examples! A
"matter-of-fact-nation", as Schopenhauer called the English. (As a
boy he lived several years in England, quite forgot there his German and had to
learn it again when he returned to Germany. Then, for his whole life, he spoke
and wrote English as well as German.) Englishmen are susceptible to examples
and truth and facts are well chosen weapons in such a nation in fights between
ideas.
----------------
That trust
must - - inter alia - - be one element in the business of note-issues,
that is clear. But trust (the word taken in its usual, popular
sense) is not sufficient. It must be supplemented by the liberty to
distrust at any moment, to any extent and for any duration. Moreover, the
occasion to manifest distrust (in the banker, in the politicians, in
"heaven", in all that a man can distrust) must always be at hand. The
Exchange must publish at every minute the state of trust and distrust
and invite everybody to trust and distrust here at the own expense and risk.
The latter being essential, so that the people quickly learn to ascribe to
paper money, notes, etc. their real value, as they did for so many decades, as
long as notes were free from cours forcé.
Let me mention here that in Germany and before 1870 the
Exchange of Frankfurt am Main was the place where notes were evaluated.
Everybody, who distrusted a note or a State note, had there an opportunity to
offer the note at the price which he himself believed to be just and had also
the right to demand notes for the price he believed just. If - - to give an
example - - the man offered for 100 Thalers notes of a bank at a discount of
10% (that is, he offered 100 Thalers paper for 90 Thalers in silver) and found
in - - say - - one week no buyer, that event was discussed at the Exchange, it
was discussed in the papers, and the question arose: Why is there no man to be
found who profits from the opportunity to win the discount? Is there nobody who
owes the bank 100 Thalers? Why does this debtor not buy the notes, pay his debt
or part of his debt and earn the discount? And after a week or so: Really,
there does not seem to exist such a debtor: Obviously, the bank granted
long-term loans in its notes, and a debtor of a long-term loan is, of course,
interested in the quotation of bank notes only at the date when he must pay the
interest and the agreed-upon fraction for the repayment of the loan.
Such discussions
did not arise in the whole world for decades.
Free Banking
requires such discussions.
It is true: The
prescription for every issuer of notes to keep ready a find in silver to redeem
his notes at par, did prevent, in many cases of distrust, such discussions,
where they would have been necessary. But many businessmen know well that if an
issuer is really not willing to redeem, then he finds ways and means to
delay redemption as long as he thinks fit.
----------------
If it were possible
to explain the note theory as simply as - - say - - the Copernican Theory may today
be explained, then the money monopoly could no longer be maintained. But at the
present stage of history the functioning of means of payment without cours
forcé seems to be a most complicated matter, just like the contemporaries of
Columbus found the theory, of the earth being a sphere, most complicated and
hardly comprehensible.
Rittershausen said
to me:
He, who represents the
money theory in a manner that average people will understand, would, perhaps,
do a greater work than Copernicus did. (Put into
"bold" by me. - J.Z.)
-------------------
(Another start-up option for Free Banking, in a nutshell,
follows. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
The way of least
resistance, at the moment, seems to me: Creating notes in denominations
of 10, 25, 50 and 100 Pounds or so, or the corresponding amounts in other
currencies, issued by factories or wholesalers, used as means of payment in
external trade, quoted daily at the Exchange, and of a kind that their
redemption can only be demanded in the way that the note holder can buy goods
at the issuer or pays debts to him. (The issuer is free to redeem the notes in
gold or other currency, if he possesses them and is willing to use them for
redemption purposes.)
The Dollar-scarcity becoming more and more a world problem,
the necessity of replacing Dollars as a means of payment in external trade by
other means no less valuable and honest, also taking into consideration, that
the Dollar-scarcity is not an economic problem but merely a problem of
bureaucracy, stupidity and oppression, the replacement of USA-Dollar-Cheques as
means of payment by "Milhaud-Pounds" seems today not impossible.
The first step
being taken, the others are not so difficult; the last being to use bonds of
small denominations as means of payment for wage payment purposes.
Please estimate, as
a business man: Here is a bond, on which is written:
"At the shop ……… in
London (address) this bond is taken as means of payment at par if one buys
there (shoes, paper, books, instruments, etc.) for the face value of the bond
(say) 50 Pounds, at least, or pays debts at the shop. The validity of the bond
expires at 31. XII. 1955.
(J.Z.: The term "bond" rather than
"note" or bank note or paper money makes clearer the nature of such
issues, as obliging the issuer rather than the acceptor. The acceptor is
offered with the bond a claim which an honest debtor and issuer can always
fulfil, independent of the mint, a bank or a central bank, namely by offering
his goods or services in exchange or his bond as a means of payment for debts
owed to him. The tragic aspect of this letter exchange is that B. never got
that message across to that advocate of "free" banking! - He also
failed with his information against Malthusianism. Even libertarians and
Stirner followers do have their "fixed ideas". - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
Take for granted,
that at the Exchanges, where the bond is offered, every visitor is convinced
that there is no swindle, and that the owner of the bond may really use it as a
means of payment in this shop as well as the usual currency. What will then be
the discount of the bond - - at Montreal, at Shanghai (in normal times), at
Rangoon, at Berlin, at Rome, etc.? That the bond will not be sold at par is
certain. But will the discount be more than - - say - - 2 % ??? And if so - -
why?
You know that 2 %
is a large margin in wholesale trade. (Provided it is not over-burdened with
taxes! - J.Z., 20.2.03.) In the corn trade, I read some years ago in the
"Manchester Guardian", the margin is usually about 2 % for the
wholesaler.
--------------
In turning over the
leaves of Keynes: "The General Theory of Employment etc." I
found:
The whole theory is built on the supposition that private
notes do not play any role in the economy and that even clearing plays no
essential role (although already 100 years ago about 99 % of all transactions
were made by clearing). Keynes is occupied only with one kind of money:
The State's monopoly money. His Theory breaks completely down if freely issued
notes are introduced into a really general theory. Keynes does
not provide this theory. It seems that until now no critic noticed that
incompleteness of Keynes' theory.
(J.Z.: Why bother with facts when you have a seemingly
beautiful and very plausible and simple theory, one which most of the
"experts" quite readily accept, just like the man in the street? -
J.Z., 20.2.03.)
---------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Copied from
various sources:
What is the
meaning of inflation?
1.) The Columbia Encyclopaedia, article: "Inflation and
deflation".
"In economics, inflation is the increase of the
circulating currency beyond the needs of trade, and deflation is the
opposite."
2.) Encyclopedia Americana, 1946 edition, article
"Inflation" by Thomas L. Kibler, professor of economics, Ohio State
University:
"The value of money is measured by its power to command
goods and services in exchange. If this value, or purchasing power, shows a
persistent tendency to decline in terms of goods, as compared with a previous
average or norm, the trend is described as inflationary and in the
market by rising prices. If the price-rise persists and becomes significant,
the situation resulting is referred to as inflation.
The reverse phenomenon is described as deflation. Thus in
external form, inflation and deflation are manifestations of changes in the
relation between money and goods. …
As contrasted with mere price fluctuations and adjustments,
the term inflation is used to describe a dynamic and continuous upward trend of
the price level. …"
3.) Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1947 edition, article
"Inflation and Deflation" by Sir Theodor E. G. Gregory, Economic
Adviser to the Government of India, 1938:
"If we define inflation as an abnormal increase in the
quantity of purchasing power, and deflation as an abnormal decrease in the
quantity of purchasing power, the first issue which arises is: under what
technical conditions are inflation and deflation respectively possible? …"
4.) "American Economic Problems", War Department
Educational Manual, EM 221. By S. Howard Patterson, A. W. Selwyn Little and
Henry Reed Burch. Printed 1941.
Page 194: "The practice of issuing an excessive amount
of paper money or of extending an excessive amount of bank credit is called inflation.
Deflation is the opposite of inflation. it is a serious
decline in the general price level, due to a decrease in the quantity of money,
to a restriction of credit, or to an increase of goods.
Reflation is a deliberate attempt at a modest amount of
inflation to restore the general price level to the point where it was before
inflation set in. …
"5.) "Banking", by Walter Leaf, Litt D., D.
Litt., Chairman of Westminster Bank Limited, etc., London, Williams & Norgate,
1926, "The Home University Library of Modern Knowledge", vol. 124,
page 27:
"… a fiduciary currency can be expanded at will to meet
the needs of commerce and industry. The great danger of it is the ease with
which it can be used for artificial inflation, that is, an increase of credit
beyond what is needed for the normal conduct of business."
6.) John Maynard Keynes, "The General Theory of
Employment, Interest and Money", impression of 1949, page 118/119:
"When full employment is reached, any attempt to
increase investment still further will set up a tendency in money-prices to
rise without limit, irrespective of the marginal propensity to consume; i.e. we
shall have reached a state of true inflation."
Page 303: "When a further increase in the quantity of
effective demand produces no further increase in output and entirely spends
itself on an increase in the cost-unit fully proportionate to the increase in
effective demand, we have reached a condition which might be appropriately
designated as one of true inflation.
Bth., 9. II. 1950.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 11.
II. 1950. Your letter of 8. II. 50.,
just received,
Your letter of 4. II. 50., received 8. II. 50.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
today no more than a short confirmation of receipt.
I thank you very
much for your kind offer to pay for me a voyage to the West. I am very sorry,
that I cannot accept it, inter alia because my health does not permit me such a
long voyage.
----------------
You are right:
Treating serious matters briefly is practically impossible - - the main
check to every progress, Free Banking included.
----------------
Runge's
Method. Firstly, it should be
calculated: How much does the government spend in notes and how much does it
pay by clearing or cheques? Possibly the latter part is the greater. Should
that be the case (and I believe it is), then the government says: What shall I
do with the many notes, received by the tax collectors? It must, as soon as
possible, bring the notes to the banks and from there the notes go to business
men and at leas a part of the deflationary tendency, produced by Runge's
method, is counter-balanced.
In no case can the effect of Runge's method be that the
price level sinks considerably.
(J.Z.: Well, intentional credit restrictions and deflations
have happened, usually with disastrous results. Not all, if any, economic
processes are painlessly reversible. To take a very simple analogy: It is easy
to squeeze out a toothpaste tube. But then try to refill it again, without
special equipment! Or, if you have had the misfortune to have driven over a
person, killing him, then reversing the car over him will not bring him to life
again. Or, try to reverse the growth of a baby - or of your own belly! - J.Z.,
20.2.03.)
It must also be considered, that prices in West-Germany - -
counted in gold - - are already very low. That house wives and all other
consumers demand a further lowering is not yet a sufficient reason to believe a
further lowering to be justified.
If Runge would say: I wish that butt49 would cost only so
and so much, bread, clothing, etc., so and so much. Then the butter-dealer
would - - of course - - at once say: Certainly, all prices that I must pay
ought to be reduced, but the butter-price, that's another matter, etc. Then the
dealer's arguments must be investigated.
Count in gold, let
competition work and Free Banking, too, then the right price of every
product will be paid and can be paid - - that's my method.
--------------------
Lectures. There are many people in Heidelberg,
in Frankfurt and other places, who do understand enough English to hear your
lecture. A lecture delivered by an Englishman would be accepted with the most
favourable prejudices. If a German speaks, then the first thought of the
listeners is: Very probably he is a blockhead, just like we are. Why should it
be otherwise?
-------------------
Paying for
German imports. Certainly, Germany
could pay for her imports, but the right methods of paying must be
permitted or enforced. A beginning has been made: Imports from Denmark can now
be paid in German marks.
The possibility to
pay for her imports has not much to do with the stand of production compared
with 1936. I cannot believe that now 93 % are produced of what was produced in
1936 - - more than 50% of Germany's plant being destroyed by the war and by the
dismantlings. (Demontagen - Recovery in West Berlin was much slower than in
West Germany and in East Berlin and in East Germany very much slower than in
West-Berlin. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
I hope to say still
something about this matter in one of my next letters.
------------------
The effects of the
Wörgl-experiment are generally judged by the quasi-logical principle:
"post hoc ergo propter hoc". I spoke about the matter in my book
about unemployment.
------------------
The party programs
you are kind enough to send to me, are real catastrophes. The Labour Party
Program - - as bad as it is - - is much better worked out.
The Parties think,
that important reforms are possible without Free Banking and Free Trade.
Political leaders with such errors in their brains cannot possibly produced
programs of any value.
------------------
Treating letters by
the post. The German post forms big parcels of the letters, cords the parcels
with wire (probably with machines for that purpose) and by that procedure the
letters differing in the least from the usual small size are damaged. There is
only one real help: 25 on the ….. of every official who damages a letter. In a
new constitution, which I would like to frame, a paragraph to secure letters by
the old oriental method will be included.
-----------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 12.
II. 1950.
Dear
Mr. Meulen,
yesterday I received:
1.) The New Statesman and Nation, of 21. I. and 27. I.,
2.) The Thinker's Digest, Summer 1949,
3.) The Economic Digest, February 1950,
4.) Backstreet Surgery,
5.) Diphteria Immunisation,
6.) City Press of 27. I. 50.
Many thanks. The papers are so interesting that I am tempted
to set aside all other things and for 2 or 3 days do nothing than read these
papers.
Opening your
mailing, I found at first sight the news that the Philippine Government permits
gold mines to sell 75 % of their output on the open market. The realise price
was 57 dollars an ounce. If that price could be regarded as not artificial or
influenced by great but temporary influences (the demand from China seems to be
such an influence), I would derive from that price a value of 36 old
Gold-Pfennig for the devalued West-Mark. The calculation is thus:
1 West-Mark legally = 0.238 Dollars,
1
Troy-ounce = 57 Dollars,
1
Troy-ounce = 31.101 grams,
1,000 grams fine gold, legally = 2790 old Gold-Mark.
1 West-Mark = 31.101 x 0.238 x 2790 x 100 =
36 old Gold-Pfennig.
1,000 x 57
The fraction may be written:
2065 = 36.
57
More generally is: 2065 = the value of 1 West-mark in old
Gold-Pfennig.
Dollar price
per ounce
It is difficult to
estimate the influence of China's demand. But at a time, when all
communications were still open - - a year or so ago - - a price of 70 and more
Dollars was reported. That price was generally considered as over-estimated and
produced by China's urgent demand. But 57 Dollars is, probably (in my opinion),
not very far from the "real" price of gold, that means, the price
which would be quoted if the market would not be influenced by war, civil war, and such conditions. I
estimate: 50 Dollars would be the "true" price (pretty
approximately). 2065: 50 =41.
Counted in old
Gold-Pfennig, the price level in West-Germany and in Berlin is low and - - I
estimate - - lower than it was 1913.
I think the old
Gold-Pfennig to be a good measure of value, because I am a believer in Adam
Smith's doctrine: If a commodity X requires Y days of labour to be produced,
and an ounce of gold requires Y days of labour too, then in the long run the
commodity X will be sold for an ounce of gold. The doctrine was - - as a
self-evident one - - acknowledged by all economists from Smith to Marx. The
latter took it repeatedly as a good example to demonstrate his doctrine, that labour
is that what constitutes value. Jevons corrected that doctrine by stating: Not
the spent labour constitutes the value but the expected quantity of
labour to get the valuated thing.
The difference is
of the greatest importance, and I regret that Jevons, unrivalled in style and
exactness, did not represent all consequences, although he certainly saw
them.
If Marx would here have been in the right (he meant
the spent quantity of labour) then the "Labour-Money" of
State-socialists would be a good and just money. But if the element of
"expectation" is essential, then no money can be considered as good
and just, if it is not constantly exposed to a free market, where the
expectation of all people interested in the value of money does act.
(J.Z.: Regarding the value relationship between an ounce of
gold and the labour hours required to produce it: I would assume that advanced
tools and automated gold mining equipment would have had an influence upon that
relationship, even if one takes into account that these tools and machines also
constitute labour done in advance, including that for mining and processing
e.g. the iron and steel for them. If they hadn't saved labour, then there would
hardly have been any sense in employing such tools and machines. To that extent
the relationship between a gold weight and labour hours should have been
changed. But on the other hand: Advanced tools and automated equipment have
also increased the productivity of an hour of skilled labour, and thereby its
wages, in all other spheres. That fact may balance matters again. - J.Z.,
20.2.03.)
From the Marxist
concept (which, although erroneous, is by no means unscientific) follows, that
the government must measure by scientific methods the quantity of labour
contained in all goods, firstly to justly compensate the producer and secondly
to fix a just price for the consumer. It follows, too, that the money market -
- here being obviously a disturbing influence - - should be suppressed.
From Jevons'
concept follows that the first thing to get an honest value is to expose money
to the money market. The opinion of scientists and experts about the value of
goods is then merely one of the acting influences, and will in most
cases be an important one and sometimes a deciding one, provided it is
generally known.
The premature death
of Jevons (who died at the age of 47, when many celebrated men began to
write) was a disaster for science and revolution, this word taken in the sense
of Tucker.
Let me add, that
Adam Smith did not yet distinguish between spent and expected labour and
insofar one cannot say: he was in the wrong. His theory simply was not
developed enough.
In a society
neither progressing nor regressing, the Marxian value and the Jevons-value
coincide. But such a society is practically and theoretically impossible.
------------------
Vaccination,
Immunisation. I agree with you
completely that if by Free Banking and Free Trade the people's situation was improved, then
children and adults, very probably, would come to posses more natural
resistance than can be achieved by vaccination and immunisation. Should it even
be possible to strengthen that force by vaccination and immunisation, then
these advantages would be counterbalanced by the disadvantage that government
interference has in matters where many of the best and most enlightened
citizens are of the opinion that it should not interfere, such an interference
being "ultra vires" of a democratic government. But if parents wish
to vaccinate their children, then they should have the right to do so. May the
adherents of vaccination and the adversaries lay their arguments before the
public. Truth will win in the long run.
Another thing is
that injections doing no harm for the first time of application, may be deadly
if applied a second time. Some decades ago that was observed in Germany and a
theory, which I am inclined to believe, just was worked out to explain the
phenomenon.
Did you read Rider
Haggard's "She"? I read it about 50 years ago and was delighted.
(Some weeks ago I found the book in a shop and read again some pages. I still
found it very nice.) In one of the last chapters queen "She" applies
a water by the use of which she gets constant youth, more than 2,000 years ago.
But applied for the second time the water acts in the opposite direction - - a
quality which "She" did not know before. She grows old within a few
minutes, passes quickly the stage of an age of 100 years, becomes a mummy,
which lives for a few minutes and then a real mummy as dead as others. The
story is reported as happening near Zimbabwe in South Africa, where really
strange events happened in old times and perhaps still happen. (Machiavelli,
who certainly knew nothing of the Chinese Foong Shooee (or however it
may be written in English) says: Experience proves that the same soil always
produces the same events, so singular these events may seem.) The experience of
"She" is exactly what modern biology (at least the German) asserts to
be true of protective injections. Poets are prophets.
(That is a remark to the pamphlet "Diphteria
Immunisation", where the author says: He sees no reason why an
injection should act so differently if applied a second time. A scientist
respects facts, even if he cannot explain them.)
-----------------
During the American
Civil War some Southern fanatics tried to spread yellow fever in Northern
districts and in Northern regiments. They sent clothing, infected at new
Orleans and other towns, where the infectious yellow fever is always abundant -
- even when more useful things are not abundant - - with yellow fever bacteria,
to adherents in the North. The recipients sent the clothing by parcels, with
invented addresses for the sender, to people in districts like the slums of New
York and sent them to soldiers as presents. What happened? Nothing! As bad as
the sanitary conditions were at that time in the army and among the civilians,
they were good enough to protect them against the yellow fever. (In the North!)
This attempt would
never have become known if, many years after the Civil War, someone involved
had not spoken about it. Suppose that the attempt would have been betrayed
before the parcels arrived. Perhaps Lincoln would then have ordered the whole
people to be vaccinated. Then it would have been "observed", that
really not a single case of yellow fever occurred. Triumph of vaccination!
-----------------
In "Thinker's
Digest" of Winter 1949, John Dewey, in his article "Does Human
Nature Change?" says:
"… The savage,
living in a primitive society, comes nearer to being a purely 'natural' human
being than does a civilised man."
Although here proof
or refutation are not possible, I must say, that I do here agree with a theory
common about 100 years ago among German Ethnologists (and probably among others
as well). That theory (Schopenhauer was
an adherent) says: Culture is for mankind as natural
as breathing and eating, as building "dams" for beavers, as making
nests for fowls and cobwebs for spiders. Culture should not be confounded with
technique, but even technique sometimes seems to grow in human minds as
feathers grow on birds. Remember the boomerang, the African "drum language"
(which until now no European could learn) and the art of producing certain
sounds which paralyse every man who hears them. (I read of such sounds in an
old report, given by Leif, the Norman-Greenland conqueror, when he had
fights with the inhabitants of Massachusetts (or Delaware) some centuries
before Columbus. The learned editor said that the art of producing such sounds
is not yet quite lost among the American natives.)
It is also known
that Australian Aboriginal marriage laws are so complicated that only few
European scientists learn them, but they are effective to avoid inbreeding in
small tribes.
Being cultural
belongs to man's very nature, says the old theory.
(J.Z.: I remember reading somewhere in Roscher some facts on
tests between the physical strength of natives, supposedly living the natural
and healthy life and sailors and traders, supposedly living an unnatural life.
In all these contests the "civilised" and unnatural
"whites" came off much better, as a rule. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
-------------------
On some other
points I hope to say some words in later letters.
------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 18.
II. 1950. Your letter of 16. II., just
received.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I did not yet fully reply to some of your letters. I do hope
to catch up in the next days, the cold now being now much diminished.
Your visit.
If I would know when you come, I would make some preparations for a lecture at
the British Information Centre, Berlin-Halenesee, Kurfuerstendamm 156. Then you
must deliver there a lecture. Consider that all great movements in the
world began with lectures. Christendom, Islam, Fascism, the Act of 1844, and
others of less importance. And Free Banking should renounce lectures?????????
Scotland,
Independence. A movement with the
aim of independence for Scotland, without considering her monetary
independence, does not deserve the name of a movement. And it Gibson
united all inhabitants
of Scotland but without insisting on Free Banking for
Scotland, then his movement is of less importance than any Scotch society for
the amusement of its members.
People, who pretend
to be Individualists and do not acknowledge the Individual's right to offer his
labour in the form of freely issued notes, are no true Individualists. Insofar
I say: You did not loose them.
--------------------
Weekly Register.
Catholics - - astonishing!!! But my first impression was not the best. I asked
some of my Catholic friends: Why do you not insist on your pope's demand in the
Encyclica Quadragesimo Anno", that the State should not do for the
Individual what Individuals can do for themselves? Why do you not apply this
doctrine to note-issuing? Of course: they did not answer.
But they are not quite
wrong: The Free Banking idea blows up, together with many other old Isms, also old
Catholicism and replaces it by a quite new one. I think you know the Catholic
"Modernism", which starts from Kant. (Abbé Loisy in France,
Schell in Germany and others. The movement is now extinguished, but I think it
merely became subterranean.)
---------------------
Truth. Is
insofar excused, as it would be lead by the logic of Free Banking to an extreme
revolutionary movement, and of that the editor has a presentiment. But, as the
German saying goes: "Was nicht ist, kann werden." (What does not yet
exist can, nevertheless, develop. - J.Z.)
Zwangskurs. I hope to enter into more details than I can
today in one of my next letters.
Annahmezwang.
Example of Annahmezwang, without cours forcé:
The government permits quoting the value of the paper every
day at the Exchange, with the value expressed in gold units (gold-marks,
ounces, etc.). But the government says: While nobody has the right to decline
the paper money as a means of payment, nobody is obliged to take the paper
money at its face when, at the Exchange, a discount is quoted. In such a case
it need only be taken at its exchange- value. Thus, if a landlord says: Pay a
gold coin or pay
a greater nominal value in paper, when at the exchange the
paper is at a discount of 15 %, then the landlord is in the right. I beg to
refer you to page 106 of "Free Banking".
At the time, when Lord King issued his circular to his
tenants, the English Paper Money had, in the opinion of Lord King
"Annahmezwang" but not cours forcé.
And really, a special law must be enacted to endow the notes
with cours forcé and not merely with "Annahmezwang". Legal tender were
the notes already before the law of 1811.
----------------
Inflation. What
you say in your letter under the heading "Zwangskurs", about the
business of banks is true, but it is - - I think - - not all that is to be said
about this business.
The banker's
debtors could issue their own notes, if they are known to the public as well as
the banker is. But the businessmen are not known as well to the public and
therefore the banker says to them: Give me those notes, which you would issue,
and take mine in exchange. I lend you my notes.
If one
admits that, then one must also admit, that the banker cannot issue a greater
quantity of notes than his debtors - - these debtors taken as a "commercial
body"- - could issue. (Because the "readiness to accept" the
notes, by these debtors, forms the real foundation of their value. - J.Z.,
20.2.03.)
Where would be the
limit of issue for the debtors, if they issued the notes themselves, so as businessmen
did 150 years ago?
The natural limit
would be the possibility to "make good" presented notes by ready for
sale commodities or services or by accepting the notes as means of payment for
due debts. Therefore, also the banker's limit is what his debtors can make good
in this way.
The normal
circulation path is: Notes go from the banker to the debtor (a shop, a factory,
a tradesman, etc.), from the debtor to the debtor's employees, his landlord,
his supplier, etc., from there the greatest part back to the debtors, a smaller
part into the public, and from there to the debtors. From the debtors the notes
go back to the banker. ("Rückstrom".) (Compare my circulation charts,
in PEACE PLANS No. 41, which is now also available by e-mail. - J.Z.)
That is the
fundamental principle to which note issuing is unavoidably led if it is, on the
one side, not limited by prescriptions to keep a redemption fund and, on the
other side, it is not aided by a cours forcé of the notes.
There are other
theories, arisen at times when
1.) all businessmen and all scientists without one
exception (Adam Smith included) believed, that a redemption fund was the true
basis of note-issuing business,
2.) there were the prescriptions on redemption funds and
also on denomination of notes. (Notes for small amounts were prohibited.) Thus
the whole country was constantly in a condition of deflation - - the word taken
in the sense of 1913 - - that is, a state where fresh notes were eagerly
accepted, and a banker, who granted long-term loans in notes could profit from
such a condition.
These theories
said:
1.) Long-term loans in notes are the very task of a banker,
2.) in the absence of people who wish to become creditors,
it is permitted and natural to "raise money by circulation" as the
thing was called at the time of Adam Smith. The way is: The debtor pledges a
mortgage to the banker, the banker, in return gives the debtor notes, the
debtor pays his expenses with the notes and all concerned expect a boom, which
shall enable the debtor to repay the banker. The real creditor is here the note
bearer, who renounces his claim to an equivalent for his note from the banker
or the banker's debtors. Reason: He "trusts" in the banker, the word
"trust" here taken in its popular sense.
(J.Z.: This dishonest, careless and dangerous practice,
wide-spread and well known, probably led to the theory that issuing notes would
be nothing but the taking up a loan from the public, without the public even
being aware of this. All kinds of confidence tricksters do the same but this
was no reason for the theory to be seriously accepted and expounded in text
books and to ignore all sound alternative issue and reflux theories explaining
the value of the notes as really existing in their acceptance or clearing
option among people who do have to accept them, instantly, at par, and not
merely upon an unfounded "trust", or "confidence", in an
economy that is starved for cash. Even now most bankers and their staff, even
most economists, are merely practitioners, more or less law abiding, and know
nothing of true monetary theory. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
I wish that there
were many people who, after the repeal of the present money laws, would
undertake the note issuing business on this basis. Within a few weeks they
would be in a very bad situation, once some note holders would say: We
do no longer trust in you. Tell us, here and now, and rather quickly, how to
use your notes. Nobody of my acquaintance will accept them.
Notes issued on the
"clearing cheque principle" would not be endangered by distrust. If
the note bearers come to the banker and ask: What can we do with the notes? -
he says: Here are the addresses of my debtors. Buy there anything or pay your
pay your debts to him, if the man is your creditor.
The greater the
panic is, the greater will be the speed with which the notes will disappear
from circulation, together with the adhering distrust. The advantage is quite
with the debtors, of whom some will say: Two more such panics and we are rich
men! (J.Z.: Not quite. At most they would have twice a total turnover of their
goods, leaving them only the normal profit margins. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
Notes issued on the old principles will not (rapidly
enough - J.Z.) disappear (and neither will their discount - J.Z.). The effect will be that the banker, who
issued these notes, will never again be trusted and must change his business.
(He might also be sued for fraud! - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
Speaking or writing
will, probably, do nothing to make the true principles of note- issuing
popular, under the now prevailing conditions, but experiences of
the here suggested kind will.
-----------------
The role of
deposits under the new regime will be different from the present one.
If the deposits
consist of notes, the banker can grant loans in notes and for a time
equal to the time within which the depositary can withdraw his deposit. ,
If the deposits do not
consist in notes, the banker must judge what to do with such deposits.
At the moment such considerations concerning deposits are
not necessary. Every bank is able to transform deposits of every substance into
notes simply by ceding the deposits to the Bank of England or one of the Big
Five and getting notes for the ceded deposits. A central bank like the Bank of
England can, without hesitation, change deposits of all kinds into notes. Why?
Its notes are endowed with cours forcé. If the Bank of England commits blunders
in transforming deposits into notes, nobody observes it, neither the Bank nor
the public. Then the only possible sign of alarm, that is, a discount of the
notes, is impossible (for internal trading! - J.Z., 20.2.03.) for its notes are
endowed with cours forcé. Moreover, in a great economy, like the English, a
blunder must be of the greatest dimensions before it seriously affects the
country's economy.
After this long
preface I finally undertake to answer your question in your letters of 9.II.
and 16.II.
Influence of
bank loans on the general price level.
You know Jevons'
admirable "Investigations in Currency and Finance". Here Jevons, for
the first time, pointed out that bank loans as well as prices obey a certain
periodicity. This periodicity was confirmed by all later investigations, also
by the latest known today. Jevons tried to explain it and said: (I cannot quote
him literally, his book being burned with my library - - about 3,000 volumes.)
"Until now agriculture's purchases are of very great
influence and probably of greater influence than any other economic factor.
Agriculture's purchases depend upon crops, crops depend upon the weather and
weather depends upon sunshine, which may be admitted, although the law of sun's
shining is still not yet detected. But it is very probable, that the quantity
of heat, which the earth receives from the sun is in connection with the
sunspots, although we do not know the nature of the connection. The average
periodicity of the sunspots is, as everybody knows, about 11- 1/9 years."
It was also noticed, that the threefold of that period = 33
1/3rd years, is still much more distinctly marked and the nine-fold
= 100 years, is still much more distinctly marked. The numbers 11 1/9, 33 1/3
and 100 are averages, but in this century it seems that meteorological data are
pretty exactly reproduced from the years of the 19th century in 100
years' distance. (For 1955 I expect a great dearth and earthquakes of greatest
dimensions.) Darwin estimates that in 1855 about 4/5 of all birds in England
died by frost. (Tokyo was destroyed in 1855 by an earthquake greater
than that of 1923.
When remembering
the great regularity of Jevons' periods, I get the suspicion that bank loans
are a secondary factor and their laws of contraction and expansion is au fond
the same as that of prices, but in a way that there is no immediate connection,
in the form of cause and effect, between expansion of bank loans and price
level. Here, too, one should not
conclude merely from: Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
For Germany, I
think, there is a positive factor helping to estimate the influence of bank
loans on the price level, which means, in this case, not to over-estimate it.
Professor Hirsch, a very able economist (he fled to Denmark in 1933) estimated,
for the year 1930, the value of all goods in Germany produced for sale and
ready for sale, as coming to about 30,000 millions of gold-marks,
For normal years (1930 was a bad year) (leaving many goods
unsold - J.Z., 20.2.03.), the quantity might be a little smaller. 30,000
million gold-marks in a considerable amount, while the sum of new bank loans,
exceeding the average amount, is relatively small. (I regret that I cannot
indicate numbers at the moment). It is not probable that new bank loans,
insofar as they exceed the average amount of a year's new bank loans, would
greatly influence the prices of a goods quantity worth 30,000 millions.
One must also consider that possessors of saleable goods are
not very willing to rise the prices of their goods (when they are already
over-stocked and under strong competitive pressure - J.Z., 20.2.03.) They are,
on the contrary endeavouring to keep their prices always as low as possible.
(When sales are easy, and it is a "seller's market", then the
opposite applies. But even in a depression they still try to get as much as
possible for their goods. - J.Z., 20.3.03.)
There is still
another influence. The greatest part of new bank loans exceeding the average
amount of new bank loans, is poured into the Exchange. The new credits are in
first line used to buy shares. Here the influence is very great. In the
year 1927 the level of share prices trebled within a year, inter alia because
abundant bank credit enabled many business men to purchase shares, who, without
these credits would not have purchased them. The prices of goods follow in the
far distance.
(J.Z.: This kind of a bank-financed buying spree for shares,
due to an over-estimation of their future value, almost had to be followed by a
collapse of share prices. Even men with large funds at their disposal do not
always make rational decisions when investing them, as the ups and downs of the
markets in securities have often demonstrated. Even there something like a gambling fever seems to arise, at
least occasionally. How many short-term bank deposits were as badly and
long-term invested, by banks and their debtors? - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
---------------
Economists usually
consider merely the influence of fresh bank loans, but - - as far as I can
ascertain - - they seldom consider the effect of the necessity to repay
these loans. The repayment must in all respects produce effects contrary to
those of the granting of loans. If one would object, that, regularly, the loans
are not repaid but - - for the greatest part at least - - replaced by fresh
loans, I would answer that in this case the fresh loans would not produce any
effect. Anticipating the objection, I said some lines before: "… new bank
loans insofar as they surpass the
average amount of a year's new bank loans."
----------------------
Are banks free to
grant loans or to refuse them? I think, they are not. If that would be true,
that banks are not free to grant or to refuse loans, but always must
lend out what they can lend out, then they are also not in the situation
to investigate the country's resources before lending. (Also, those bankers
whom I know, are quite unable to estimate a country's resources - - a task which even scientists, in many
cases, are not able to perform.)
But, you are right to emphasise the dates of bank
loans. Here banks are free to a certain degree, except when they permit to produce, with the help of bank
loans, things like buildings, great machines, and others which do produce the
money for their repayment but do so only in instalments distributed over some
or many years. In this case the bank may try to call in its loan. Then the
debtor can't pay.
I think that the
following is true:
1.) The influence of
fresh bank loans upon the general price level of goods (shares excluded) is
small, because the quantity of fresh loans is small when compared with the
quantity of goods whose price may be influenced.
2. Whenever
observations shows an increase of bank loans and a rising of prices, then there
is to be deducted the influence of an unknown but existing cause which lets both
increase at the same time and, insofar, excludes an immediate influence of bank
loans on prices.
I do know that in
general economists are likely to attribute a great influence on the price level
to the granting of fresh bank loans. I think they over-estimate that influence.
(J.Z.: However, under the influence of the theory of
"asset currencies", banks might submit their long-term loan credits,
or the corresponding securities, to the central bank in exchange for additional
paper money with cours forcé. Then these additional notes would drive up the
general price level. - J.Z., 20. 2. 03.)
---------------
You say in your
letter of 16. II.: "… the mere absence of cours forcé will not render such
over-issues impossible".
I admit this
possibility and admit, too, that at the time when bank notes had not yet a
cours forcé such over-emissions were really executed.
(J.Z.: Often upon notions of
"asset-currencies", of confidence and trust, or belief in 1/3rd
cover by rare metals. The need for "shop foundation" was certainly
not widely recognized then and isn't even now. - J.Z., 20. 2. 03.)
---------------------
But: If coins of precious metal are not prohibited,
then there must arise a situation where the public finds out that coins are of a higher value than
notes, except in those cases where there are places or persons who accept notes
an they would accept coins, and are obliged to do so, so that the public,
insofar, may trust in them.
(In other respects these persons may be the greatest rascals,
but an obligation to accept for payments notes so as they would accept coins
has nothing to do with honesty, the word taken in the popular sense.
Take for an example railway notes as they were proposed by
Zander. The manager of the railway may be a rascal and all officials, who sell
tickets, too, so that nobody would lend them one pound. But if the manager and
the officials are obliged to accept their own notes, as they would
accept coins, and this obligation is secured, then the public trusts them
insofar. This kind of trust is quite different from the trust described in old
books, where the public's trust in the banker and his honesty, ability,
prudence, etc. was described as the true basis of banking.)
Or do you not admit
my supposition, that coins will circulate, if they are not prohibited?
I assert that they will circulate, even if there exists no mint.
Private factories that manufacture medals will make coins for possessors of
gold or silver or it will be as in China, at the time of the emperors and short
time afterwards, where Sycees, privately
manufactured, were in general use. (In form silver shoes, weight 50 Tael or
about 58 ounces. I take the numbers from Ottomar Haupt, Arbitrages et Parités,
1894. The Sycees contained 0.932 fine silver.
Perhaps you will
also not admit that, if it is not prohibited, shopkeepers and other businessmen
count in gold units. From Germany I know, that only by hard punishments can the
people be prevented from counting in gold units, and I know as well that in all
countries (Tibet and perhaps a few others excepted) such punishments are
inflicted if people do not count in domestic paper money.
If one admits my
suppositions one admits too, that a discount on the bullion market (formerly
called gold market) is taken by everyone as an alarm signal that there is
something wrong with the notes which got the discount, and - - being no cours forcé - - people will
widely refuse the suspect notes as a means of payment. If that happens, then
there do not exist sufficient opportunities to use the notes at par, although
they are at a discount.
Such opportunities are:
1.) Shops which can accept the notes at par as long as they
are indebted to the issuer. The shops can use the accepted notes as means of
payment to the issuer. It will perhaps be necessary that at times when notes
are at a discount, the shops where the notes are accepted at par, will be made
known to the public by posters. (In their own interest they will inform the
public by such posters, but an agreement between issuer and debtor will still
be necessary.)
2.) The banker's counters. Many people will use the
depreciated notes to deposit them with the banker, if they trust him. The
interest for deposits must be high enough.
------------------
Some people will
say: A note-issuing banker cannot grant long-term loans under conditions as
described. The whole note issuing business is of little value if long term
loans by the banker are practically excluded.
(Here B. might simply have replied: To supply long-term
credit is not the aim of note issues. To supply short-term turn-over
credit or clearing facilities for ready for sale goods, services and labour is.
Once that sphere of current exchange options is saturated with means of payment
or clearing facilities, then there will be surpluses, saved and invested with
the aid of a bank. In these cases the savers and investors, not the bank, do
really supply the long-term capital, under conditions attractive enough for
them. Notes are not a long term loan from the public, according to an
old and popular fallacy. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
I say: Until now it
has never been a problem to get long-term loans if the opportunities to lend
out money or goods on long terms are made easily accessible. For England that is
proven by the low interest for long term loans in the last century. How often
were - - especially in North England - - mortgages obtained for 2 1/2 % p.a.!
In Germany the interest for long-term loans was always a
little higher than in England, but seldom exceeded 5 % and 4% were considered
as normal. A banker, whom the people trust (in this case trust is
necessary in the popular sense of the word) will always find depositors who
provide him with sufficient means. From the Building Society Business I know,
that for English Building Societies it has always been easier to get
money than to find reliable debtors.
A note-issuing banker as creditor for long-term loans is not
necessary. (Nor would he be economically or morally justified! - J.Z. 20.3.03.)
As a mediator he will always be welcome.
-----------------
Other people will
say: Then we prefer the present system of notes endowed with cours forcé. To
grant loans on long terms and in notes is possible under this system, for the
issuing bank, as a long and - - for Germany and other countries painful
experience has taught.
My answer: Certainly there are people who profit by
long-term loans in notes granted by the Central Bank. That is no reason to
compel others to respect the cours forcé.
(J.Z.: Usually the debtors profit, temporarily, at the
expense of the creditors. In the long run the debtors are also disadvantaged by
inflations - for who will grant them sufficient credits under such conditions?
They will soon run out of fools, who let themselves be thus victimised. - Let
the "greenbackers". "Social Credit fanatics", legal tender
fans, central bank advocates etc. have it - among themselves and at their
expense and risk only. That experimental freedom might teach them, in the long
run. Reasonable arguments and cited facts will not. But if they try to force
their requisitioning certificates upon dissenters, instead of applying them
only in their own and voluntaristic private payment community, then they ought
to be resisted, if necessary with organised military forces: ideal militias for
the protection of individual rights and liberties. - J.Z., 20.2.03.)
--------------
Very interesting
your information that notes with an option clause circulated at par, in old
times, although they were at a discount at the bullion market. (Your letter of
8.II.)
"At par".
- Was that a parity of option notes with other notes or with coins
of the same face value?
In every case the
thing is difficult to understand. Suppose that notes without an option clause
were not at a discount relative to gold coins and option notes are.
Would it not have been, in this case, a simple procedure to
convert option notes without loss into other notes and buy then gold coins with
these notes? And if this procedure was possible, how could option notes be at a
discount?
I must confess that
I do not quite understand why option notes were at a discount at all. There
were always opportunities to buy with them the same quantity of goods as with
other notes, especially from debtors of bankers, as you pointed out (very
interesting) at page 81 of your book. I am inclined to believe that the
discount was merely a "spoken" discount ("gesprochener
Kurs" say German business men, if they know that the quotation is not
derived from real sales.) and would have disappeared if earnestly put to the
test. I assume that the discount was only observed when small amounts of coins
were wanted and this very quickly.
You know that, I do
much appreciate the option-clauses and do think it necessary to systematically
extend and develop the idea here taken as the basis.
-----------------
You write: "I
do not think that the remedy for this is to limit bank advance."
I agree and would
add that the sole limit for note-issuing is the discount of the notes at a real
and great bullion market (as it perhaps did not exist in the Scotland of 200
years ago).)
Further: I think it must still be proven that prices really
rise as a consequence of issuing notes without cours forcé.
If the community does not possess enough means of payment,
then it may happen that prices fall (or have fallen - J.Z.) as a consequence of
this deflation, the word taken in the sense of 1913. If then and by a
fresh issue of notes prices do rise, to their normal level, that is no inflation
but reflation as the thing is called, quite aptly, by modern economists.
But here an well as
in my preceding explanations I took as prove that all prices will be measured
in gold, if the people have the liberty to do so, while you propose a
"bank pound" as a unit of value, so that even gold and silver become
mere commodities, not themselves value units.
I do hope we will
discuss the matter. Perhaps we will conclude a provisional agreement on the
following basis:
1.) I admit that gold
is no ideal measure of value and that no arrangement should be
prohibited which, in the opinion of their inventors procure better measures, in
the first line your bank pound.
2.) The propaganda for the bank pound or similar units
should be absolutely free.
3.) You admit: It tomorrow the now existing restrictions and
prescriptions about the value unit, about pricing, gold clauses etc. are
abolished the people will not be mentally prepared to use another value unit
than gold. Workers and artisans will demand gold wages, the prices in the shops
will be gold prices, gold coins will become visible and if they are not
manufactured by the government's mint, then they will be privately
manufactured by medal manufacturers.
For a long time I
was an adherent of Irving Fisher and still believe him to be one of the
greatest scientists who ever lived. His "Making of Index Numbers"
will be - - I am convinced - - for many years what Ptolemaeus' book on
astronomy has been for that science. For a mathematician the reading of the
book is a pleasure to which hardly another may be compared. In Irving Fisher's
other books there is not a line not worth reading, and yet: Now I am
convinced, I. F. underestimated the economic virtues of gold. What did much
contribute to change my opinion was the personal intercourse with adherents of
Silvio Gsell. (A Swiss name, which is written thus. Later, when SG saw, that
people generally wrote his name as it would be written in the general German
language, that is Gesell, he accepted this orthography.) I read also
many of their (very numerous) writings. There I found not only some very
important errors - - I hope to write about them in one of my next letters - -
but also a plan to enforce the system so tyrannically, that the Soviets could
learn from it. The German branch of the party published a pamphlet in which was
demanded: Not only shall everybody, who uses private means of payment, be at
once brought to the house of correction, but also every private clearing shall
be prohibited and also - - important for you - - every private credit.
The reasons which
were brought forward were:
1.) To establish the invariable money unit is the most
urgent and most important of all social reforms;
2.) This unit cannot be established by private agreements.
It can only be established be State compulsion. The
reform is so
important and so blessed that every compulsion, and may it seem cruel, is
justified.
The reasons which
should prove, that without the proposed tyranny the system could not be
introduced, seemed to me quite convincing, and for this very reason I said:
Obviously, gold is the smaller evil. From now on I become "Chrysist".
The party is now
very active again, in Germany. The leaders have pulled-in a little their claws
and speak much of liberty and such
things now heard with pleasure in Germany. I will send you in the next days a
copy of the program. The leaders are now so prudent to say nothing about the means
by which they will enforce their system and remove other systems.
From the "Economist", "Truth" and other
papers, which publish gold mine reports, I see, what a good index gold
is. Quite small alterations of the general price level do remarkably influence
the price of gold, from which I conclude, that if vice versa
gold is the price unit, said alterations will again be expressed, but
this time in a different manner, that is, in variations of the general price
level.
My impression is:
The best possible approximation to the bank pound is the old gold
sovereign. Its vicissitudes are not due to its gold- properties but to the old
and bad laws by which every creditor is entitled to claim gold coins and,
secondly, to the old redemption prescriptions.
Both may be removed without giving up gold as a measure of
value.
Let me openly confess that I consider the liberty of
choosing and agreeing, for a measure of value, upon any good or service or an
aggregate of goods or services or both or other units still to be invented, as
essential part of man's and citizen's natural rights. I would be interested if
our favourite Hon. Secretary of the Personal Rights Association here agrees.
Your proposition to
invent a clause which divides the variations in value between debtor and
creditor deserves the greatest attention. 25 years ago I published a text for
such a clause, and if I can find a copy of the monthly "Heim und
Scholle" where I published it, I send you the text.
Some years ago I got the impression that gold prices already
represent such a division, although not an exact one but only an
approximation.
Take an example:
Let all men that are able to save, save what they can
and let the savings be so invested, that the production plant is -greatly
improved. All commodities are now produced (per impossibile) for 50 % of their
former costs. Then it would be socially just to reduce all money claims, wages,
rents, taxes, etc. to 50 % but not the savings accounts.
Then the investor gets the full equivalent of his saving
activity.
Many examples could be constructed where social justice
would require distinctions and differentials but where practice would make such
distinctions impossible.
In my above pointed
out example the gold prices would fall, but they would certainly not fall so
far as not to leave an advantage to producers, too, so that the advantage of
increased cheapness really is divided among investors and others. That would be
the effect of simply counting in gold without other arrangements.
As already said: theoretically it would not be quite just,
because nobody else than investors has produced the cheapness and only they
should profit from it. (Theoretically.)
(J.Z.: Already Bastiat pointed out that under free market
conditions the workers are the major beneficiaries of increased savings and
their productive investments. The actual contribution of capital to the total
output increases, that of labour decreases and yet at the same time the share
of capital profits in the total output decreases while the share of labour
increases. The capitalist-minded might complain, while the socialist-minded
might cheer about this, once they become aware of it, if they ever do, but this
is the natural result of a laissez-faire economy. Here, too, everybody wins,
indirectly, from the growth of civilisation, of knowledge, of saving labour and
replacing human labour by "enslaved" machines, even while his
individual contribution to it might be as small as that of a baby or an infant.
The optimum result is obtained when every productive person possesses as many
of these machine-slaves as is possible and economical at any time, as many as
he can guide, program or control, in a division of labour and voluntary
collaboration process, i.e., when ownership in and responsibility for the means
of production is as widely spread and as individualised as possible. There are
natural trends in that direction. They should not be interfered with by popular
prejudices and their legalised forms or restrictions. - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
------------------
A German economist
once said: Replacing gold as a standard of value by artificial standards to
guarantee the invariability of the value unit is like replacing water, or air,
or bread, by some "Ersatz". Experience shows that this is possible for a time. At besieged
towns (II. Book of Kings, 18, verse 27, Isaiah 36, verse 12) or in war time
(your nice information about England's "bread" - - or whatever it may have been - - ) or in
diving-bells. The Ersatz may do for a time, but at last men demand what they
are accustomed to and what nature itself demands. Gold is a standard of value
given to men by nature, man should make the best of it but not abolish
it.
------------------
Abolition of
conscription. In general a very good thing.
But if a second Attila would menace England (or Germany) would
not conscription then be justified?
(J.Z.: Society should be reformed into such a free, just and
attractive one that
a) most of its members would volunteer to defend it and
b) most of the soldiers and officers of an enemy regime
would rather rise against it or desert to the free society than fight it.
For consistent and tolerant libertarians that is not an aim
that is quite out of reach, but, on the contrary, one that they have to clearly
visualise and systematically work for - if they do want to survive and achieve
full liberty for themselves as fast as possible, even if that means that they
would have to tolerate others choosing for themselves only as much liberty as
they want and can handle at their stage of development. - B. made many detailed
proposals for this. But here, as a mathematician, he discusses the extreme
case, for the defence of a somewhat free society against an extremely
authoritarian one, while enlightenment and rights, liberties and responsibilities
have as yet all too little spread in the somewhat free society. - J.Z.,
21.2.03.)
Kant says: If a government were to do what its
subjects would do, if they used the power of their full reason and knowledge,
then it governs justly and deserves the assistance of free men. It may well
happen, that the citizens themselves cannot achieve agreement, although every
of them sees well enough, that a decision must be made now. In such a
situation the ruler may act as the trustee of all.
Example: Perhaps (perhaps) in the last war there would not
have been enough volunteers to resist the Hitler's armies. If England would
have been defeated, the English would now work for Hitler and their life would
no longer be of great value, that value consisting only in the hope to get rid
of the Nazis, one day. The very men who resisted conscription would soon be
identified as pacifists, would have been caught and sent to the concentration
camps. If their number would have been greater than the number of places in the
concentration camps (a case that in the years 1944 and 1945 often occurred in
Germany KZs) then they would have been simply vaporised, as so many thousands
of Germans were. It may be, that only the conscription avoided such situations.
(J.Z.: In my talks with him B. mentioned two other cases: As
Josephus reports on the siege of Jerusalem by the Romans: Within Jerusalem
several factions bitterly and bloodily fought each other and this was a major
factor that made it possible for the Romans to conquer and destroy Jerusalem.
They did not know how to establish freedom and justice between them and to
unite sufficiently against an outside threat and thus fell to a foreign empire.
The second case was that of the siege of Magdeburg by Tilly during the 30-year
war. In Magdeburg some rich citizens had been allowed to buy themselves out of
service in the militia or to pay for a substitute. That led to a riot by the
poorer citizens, who had to bear the whole burden and risk of defending the walls
among themselves and that situation led to Tilly's victory - which much
slaughter, rape, destruction and looting. - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
---------------------
A man like Mosley
is unable to accept the "Individualist's" principles for the same
reasons as you are unable to accept Fascist principles. It would be beyond your
mentality. But there is also a consolation: A man like Mosley or any other
Fascist, is unable to apply the methods of Mao, described in
"Individualist", Nr. 1/50, page 6.
(That a Red totalitarian, like Mao, could apply it, is bad
enough! Even the Nazis had all too many volunteers, not only conscripts, from
other nations, within their armed forced. - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
Why? It's beyond his mentality. I discussed this method
often with Fascists during the last war, merely to see what effect it did have
on their mind. Most took me - - of course - - for a 150 % nationalist, when I
said to them that by this method Hitler could win the war. But some Nazis - -
and that was the most astonishing part of these discussions - - at once became
very suspicious and asked me: Who told you about such a method? Such methods
are quite anti-nazi! Hitler would never use such base methods; he does not want
them! But you - - you pretend to be a true nazi! Have you your membership-book
with you? No? You have not?? I knew that!! You are not a party-member?? Oh -
well - - I believe that!! Such a method!!!" - I went to the toilet
(it was in a restaurant in the Friedrichstrasse) and left the restaurant when
the boy with the good nose did not watch. (He was a soldier.)
In my office I had similar discussions with a similar
result.
-------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 22.
2. 50.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
the day before
yesterday I received:
1.) City-Press of 20. I. 50,
2.) Free Trader of
January/February 50,
3.) National News-Letter, 26. I., 3. II., 10. II. 50,
4.) The Scots Independent, February 50,
5.) Truth, 10. II.50.,
6.) Old Ape Pensioner, January 50,
7.) Peace News, 3. II. 50,
8.) Union, 21.I.50,
9.) Pamphlet: What Is Money for?", by Ezra Pound.
-------------------
My impression is
again: England still is a country where many people think independently or at
least try it seriously. Instructed by Kant, I consider the products of
human brains as natural products, such as plants and birds, stars and clouds.
Nature's tendency is to produce something to diminish suffering, which in all
its elements is essential, at least at its, present stage of development and as
far as our knowledge reaches.
To get one good idea in this direction, nature
produces 100 not quite so good, 1,000 still a little more out of the way,
100,000 of average kind, 80,000 of nearly average kind, but for men of taste
not worth to be known, 50,000 of decidedly bad quality and 10,000 of mere
nonsense. 5,000 may be in the direction to increase suffering, 500 are thoughts
as torturers think them, and one is an idea such as inventors of atomic bombs
conceive them.
That is the statistical consideration of development not yet
conceived by Kant, but, as early as 1835, by Quetelet in his "De
l'homme" and later in his "Physique sociale", which I all owned
and which are all burnt.
Galton extended Quetelet's methods and won astonishing
results, which I would recommend to read if I would not know that your time is
fully occupied by other things.
(You will not take too serious the above imagined numbers.)
It is now the opinion of scientists that mental differences among men (and even
animals) distributed exactly like physical differences, so that e.g. a table as
the following gives an idea how any human qualities are distributed among men:
Measured weight of
299,355 Italian recruits, numbers won in about 1900, taken from:
"Grundzüge der
Statistik" by Westergaard and Nybölle.
45 - 47
kilograms = 2
o/oo 66 -
68 kg. =
86 o/oo
48 - 5o = 21 69 -
71 = 46
51 - 53 = 79 72 -
74 = 19
54 - 56 =
172
75 - 77
= 9
57 - 59 = 210 78 -
80 = 4
60 - 62 = 203 81 - 83 = 1
63 - 65 = 147 84 - 86
= 1
_________________________________________________________________
1,000 o/oo
If the numbers are
represented by a graph one sees at once that they obey a very distinct law, and
a mathematician sees too, that the law may be expressed in first approximation
by very few constants.
If any other human (or animal) qualities are represented in
a similar manner by a graph, the graph's shape differs from group to group, but
- - and that is essential - - the statistical law expressing the
distribution is always the same.
From the foregoing
example may be seen, that nature, to produce one recruit, who weighs 85 kilos,
it needs 999 others, who weigh less. The table is abridged. In the original
table there was one recruit of 195 kilograms among 299,355 others.
In England nature
produced one "Individualist", and to attain this aim it had to
produce many other publications, which - - considered in the light of
statistics - - are in an essential connection with that, what the German
statistician Fechner (a very great man) called an
"Extrem-Wert". (Extreme value. - J.Z.)
These statistical
considerations may offer a certain consolation, if one sees how far other
publications are from the most essential point of social and political reform,
although they offer many excellent thoughts. The "Individualist"
exists, and that must at present be sufficient.
------------------
S. W. Alexander's
comments are very interesting. I read, that in Scotland the Independence
movement now extends to the dividend limitation laws. Scotch simply don't obey
and distribute dividends according to the rules of commercial honesty. S. W.
Alexander says: they are right. If one would not yet have been convinced that
Alexander is an upright, intelligent and realistically thinking man, he may be
now.
Is Gibson behind this movement? I am afraid, he is not. From
the "Scots Independent" it seems that he underestimates money
matters.
Alexander reports,
too, that the bank note printing company De la Rue is not satisfied with the
recent development in China. The Tshiang Kai Shek Government wanted very many
notes for its many inflations and monetary "reforms". Mao prints his
notes himself or gets them from Moscow, which does not mean that they are much
more valuable than those of Tshiang. But it De la Rue (that means its chairman,
B. C. Westall, whom Alexander praises much, would know something of Free
Banking and could be convinced that without Free Banking China will always
be as poor as she is now and - - coins being abolished - - is by her present
paper money system driven to attack her neighbours, and (for Westall the most
important) that Free Banking would provides his firm with more orders than it
could carry out, then he will, probably, do something for Free Banking in
China. (The secret connection between oppressive foreign policy and a bad
monetary system is still to be explained.)
------------------
Alexander estimates
that about 3 million of Calcutta's 6 million inhabitants sleep in the streets.
------------------
The Free Trader
very well compares tariff barriers to a blockade, carried out by the own
government. It should be daily repeated, that this interpretation of
tariffs is the only right one.
About Free Trade in
money the Free Trader seems not to agree with Free Trade opinions 100
years ago. I hope to write to you still some lines about it.
------------------
National
News-Letter. If Stephen King-Hall, whom
I esteem much, would be quite instructed about Free Banking, he would
have demanded, in 1945: We must impose upon Germany the Free Banking
System for our own safety. He would have protested - - merely from an English
national standpoint - - against the introduction in
in Germany of the Exclusive-Currency-System, in such an
exaggerated form as the Allies did. The political effect was as bad as informed
economists expected.
-------------------
Scots Independent.
At page three, there are some monetary questions dealt with, but only in the
style of modern vulgar economists. Marx's expression: "Vulgär-Ökonomisten"
is quite apt. I would define "Vulgär-Ökonomist" as a man, who
generalises uncritically about experiences or observations of average people or
(often) merely the opinion of some businessman about events and conditions and
thinks in this way to arrive at general principles for an economic policy.
The article does not
demand are really independent currency for Scotland.
-----------------
Truth, my
darling. From an advertisement, caption:
"Bank-Insurance Units", I see, that investment trusts still find
interest. Investment trusts are a good thing.
In many letters to
the editor people reject State-socialism. They do not know that absence of Free
Banking leads unavoidably to State socialism, if the country likes it or not.
"Liberty - -
the mother, not the daughter of order", very well and:
"Monetary
liberty - - the mother of all other liberties, which will enjoy only a short
life without the protection of
their natural
mother."
----------------
I hope you read:
"Home Rule for England" at page 146. Excellent! If Scots continue to
assist the present state of currency and insist on a monetary union with the
(former) empire, England certainly has all reason to demand Home Rule, at least
in monetary affairs.
Rommel, page
147. Let me remind you of what
Tacitus says of Corbulo, Nero's general, that for a successful
commander in chief there may arise a conflict in his soul if he sees that his
ruler is worth nothing more than to be killed. The commander must make his
choice: fulfil his duty towards his fellow citizens or his duty towards his
sovereign. Tacitus says: The commander should fulfil his duty towards his
fellow-citizens and try to depose the tyrant. If he does not, the tyrant will
kill him, if he can do it without much danger. If Rommel really would
have been a great man, he would have known that without having read
Tacitus; but he was merely a talented man. It is now known that Hitler did with Rommel what
Nero did with Corbulo.
------------------
In my next letter I
hope to write some words about the rest of the printed matters sent. They are
extremely interesting.
------------------
Elections. I
predict a great victory of the Labour Party. The programs of the other parties
are real catastrophes, and an enormous economic success (full employment) is on
Labour's side. (??? - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
Guy Aldred will
probably n o t be elected. I do reproach Aldred, that during as long an
activity on the extreme left, he did never formally acknowledge the
individual's right of emancipation from the States exclusive currency. He is
not a 100 % revolutionary.
------------------
L'Unique. Until now
I got 3 issues, obviously due to your kind intercession. I thank you very
much!
------------------
Very faithfully
Yours -
signed: U. v. Beckerath.
Firm De la Rue. Roscher says: The influence of
private interests in conceiving economic theories should not be underestimated,
even if the influence acts only subconsciously, as it seems to have been the
case with Benjamin Franklin. Franklin was a friend of paper money and
wrote a dissertation on the matter, "The American Paper Money", which
was among my burnt books. Roscher says, he would, perhaps, not have been such
an ardent defender of paper money, if he would not have printed Pennsylvania's
notes at his shop. He confesses in his memoirs that the job was a very
profitable one.
I got the
impression that Roscher saw the thing in the right light when I got aware that
Franklin understood nothing of the theory of paper money and did not even
distinguish notes with cours forcé from those without. F.'s opinion was very
much influenced by his private interest in note printing. If it would not have
been the case, then F. would have penetrated the theory. (He had the head for
it - - certainly!)
Bth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U.v. Beckerath, … 3.
III. 1950. Your letter of 28. II., stamp
"Dover" of 1. III. - received
today.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
from the stamp I see that you are on the way to France and -
- I hope - - to Berlin. If the English let you pass to Berlin it will be
by airway
Is it quite
impossible that you deliver a lecture at the British Information Centre,
Berlin- Halensee, Kufürstendamm 156???
----------------
Zwangskurs. When the countrymen of Lord King brought a
charge against him for "Incivism", they did wrong. Lord King
was at that time entitled to demand more in paper pounds or the original rent
in gold coins. He was also morally in
the right, for certainly the prices of the goods produced by his tenants rose
nearly to the degree in which bullion rose in price, the latter expressed in
paper-pounds. If the later enacted cours forcé would. have been foreseen at the
time when the contracts between Lord King and his tenants were concluded, both
parties would have been content with a clause, that Lord King should get so
much money as the original amount of gold was worth at the day of payment.
Inflation. Fortunately your question: "What amount
of notes could the debtors issue?" can be exactly answered.
"That amount,
which the debtors are able to convert into articles of day-to-day-use plus the
amount which they are obliged to accept for due debts."
The method of
financing railways by note-issuing banks was a very bad one. In German they
call such dangerous things "Ritt über'n Bodensee" ("Ride across
Lake Constance.")
More than 100 years ago a horseman in a very cold
winter-night was looking for a ferry. He wanted to pass from the Northern shore
to the Southern. After some hours he saw a house and there he asked: Where is
the ferry? I must get to the Southern shore! The answer was: But, gentleman,
you are on the Southern shore! The man had ridden on the ice without
knowing it.
At that time (about
120 years ago) England was constantly in a state of deflation (the word taken
in the sense of 1913). The national amount of means of payment was quite
insufficient, and, therefore, all kinds of notes were eagerly accepted
by the public. Under such conditions it was economically possible to grant long
term loans in the form of Bank Note loans, hoping that the number of persons
demanding the "realisation" of their notes (say, by
using them as means of payment against the Bank or the
Railway) would be very small. There operated also an economic interest not
investigated by economists. Say: the notes get a discount of 4 % and the annual
interest was 4 % too, and the time of
construction also a year. Then it was for business men, who had to use the
railway's services after it was constructed, a quite natural investment to buy
the depreciated notes and to use them later as a means of payment against the
railway. This buying of notes raised their market value and certainly often to
par. In every case the real creditor
of the railways was the public, or to speak more exactly: every man who
accepted a note for the amount of the note.
The system might
work as well as passages over the ice of
Lake Constance in winter-time and if the ice-cover is thick enough, it may
be possible, but this very Lake of Constance offers some examples where persons
tried to cross the lake in hard winters and, in spite of all the theory and
"experience", the ice before them and behind them broke.
The obligation to
redeem notes in gold coins obscures all kinds of traffic where notes are
concerned.
A much better kind
of financing, than by granting notes to railways under construction, would have
been the issue of shares or debentures.
Since about the
year 1850 no railway was financed by loans granted in notes of a bank, also not
abroad (as far as I know) where it would have been possible per se. The danger
was recognised meanwhile.
But I would not
object to a repetition of the experiment, provided all possibilities for using
the notes are made known by the enterprise and, especially, the opportunities
where the notes must be accepted at par, when goods or services are paid
with the notes or due debts. Also the quantity of notes should be made publicly
known, which can possibly be accepted in this way.
If this condition
is fulfilled, then experience will prove that there is a very great difference
between a state of affairs where the circulation is fully provided with means
of payment (Has that ever happened as yet? - J.Z., 21.2.03.) and the condition
in the forties the 19th century, where the country was in a state of
great deflation, that word used in the sense of 1913. If experience reveals
another result, then people must change their opinion.
But I know that we
agree fully in the demand for a 100 % publicity.
-------------------
You say: "In a
long-date loan the entrepreneurs must be supported by the community until they
are able to market their goods."
I agree, but I ask:
In what manner must they be supported? My answer is: They must be supported by
people as shareholders, debenture-holders, partners. To "raise money by
circulation", as the thing was called, at the time of Adam Smith, would be
impossible - - I think - - in a state of full liberty for issuing. It is my
opinion, that in a state of full liberty for issuing (until now not realised in
any country), where this liberty is constantly controlled by the public's right
to refuse every kind of paper-money, the latter factor acts with great
intensity, so that, perhaps, the total amount of issued paper-money will be
smaller, per capita, than it is now. The progress will consist in every person wanting
standardised means of payment and having saleable goods or ready (and wanted -
J.Z.) services, will dispose of such
means and this in the quantity that the wants. (Within the limits of his
ability to supply wanted consumer goods and services. - J.Z.) But if the man
wants a real credit (i.e., investment capital, over a period of time - J.Z.)
then he must look out for (corresponding - J.Z.) creditors. With the help of
the banker (or a broker - J.Z.) he will easily find them.
Every other system
should be permitted under the condition that its principles are fully and
distinctly explained, so that every
person, who accepts a note from such an enterprise, knows: I grant the
enterprise a credit for the accepted amount. It is not true that I could
at any time use the notes as a means of payment for goods or services (or
debts), as I want them. What I grant is an interest-free credit.
If the system
works, we (I and people who share my opinion) must confess, that they did not
see the here involved economic connections in the right light.
On the other hand,
you already stated that it is not your intention to prohibit my system.
--------------------
I admit that
State-Socialism is unable to provide credits in sufficient quantity to support
fresh production. I admit, too, that Russia is a lamentable example. I admit a
fortiori that State Socialist Statistics, as they would be required in this
sphere, are practically impossible and if drawn up by the most able
statisticians, will be false for the simple reason that the milieu was that of
State Socialism, where everybody is interested in obscuring all his personal
affairs.
Concerning the private
investor you merely consider the man who has savings. You do not
consider the case where an owner of goods will use them as an investment.
Especially in times of a commercial crisis such possibilities should be
admitted and not prohibited by crazy bureaucracies. I proposed a technique in
my dissertation of 1934: "Die Durchführung der Vorschläge von
Milhaud". (A critic called the English translation "decidedly bad." I cannot judge
that, although my impression was, it is not quite bad, at the least. Buriot-Darsiles'
French translation is very good.)
(J.Z.: I tried to improve the English translation of this
book in my edition in PEACE PLANS No. 9 and tried the same for the following
books of B. on monetary freedom, in PEACE PLANS 9 & 11 and offered an
alphabetical index to all three in PEACE PLANS 11. All three are presently
available from me through e-mail, in RTF, free of charge, upon request, until
they are offered on a CD-ROM or on a website. - J.Z., 21.2.03. - I was promised
that the latter would happen soon. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
In Germany about a
tenth of a year's production was invested by ordinary saving. The production
being about 80 - 100 milliards of gold-marks a year, the sum of savings was
about 8,000 millions a year. (Some say, it was only about 5,000 millions a
year.) The sum of the circulating money was about 5,000 to 6,000 gold-marks. It
is clear,
that such an amount cannot be increased, year for year, by
5,000 million or more gold-marks of circulating medium.
That for Germany a quite different system than that proposed
for England is necessary, that is clear. It would be interesting to investigate
the system's possibilities by good statistics about saving, and I think,
England possesses such statistics.
In "my* system
(You will excuse the short expression. I need not, at every occasion, mention
the many details which I owe to others. What I contributed was merely the
"dot on the i".) the amount of issued notes is quite independent of a
banker's deposits; but the latter are of greatest value as assets to be lent
out, either on long terms,
on short terms, on medium terms, corresponding to the time
of "notice" of the depositary.
------------------
You write:
"The banker is able to look ahead in a way that no other man can." -
I agree fully. Your statement's truth is not diminished if one adds: The banker
may also act merely as an intermediary.
(J.Z.: Are the bankers of the past and present really well
known for taking a rightful and rational view of the long term results of their
actions? Do they always and fully inform their customers on the risks they do
take with the monies and securities entrusted to them? Are central bankers
fully aware of what they are doing to us? I have spoken with bank managers and
financial advisors who fully ignored the inflation risk in their
"advice"! - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
Indirectly your statement gives weight to your assertion,
that an individual banker will be able to do more for his customers than an
association, say, in the form of a modern cooperative. You know, that I am no
adversary of individual bankers and I think that cooperatives and individuals
should compete (not only for some time but constantly), so that the public gets
all advantages of a sound competition. But as an intermediator few cooperatives
will do what an individual banker can do, and probably the activity as an
intermediator will become the most important of all. (My opinion. It may be
wrong or at least too much generalised.)
------------------
The amount of
savings in every year is much greater than most economists take into
consideration. This great amount has had the effect, and will in future (things
like atomic bombs set aside) have the effect to provide long term credits in
all forms and amounts, as reasonably desired. It will not be necessary to rely
on loans granted in notes by a banker who "raises money by
circulation".
South Sea Bubble. It is my opinion (I may be wrong) that in the
years 1719/20 England could have got that prosperity, which would have been
natural for England, if her bad money laws would not have stopped the then
begun and quite natural progress. At that time the few economic blunders were
alone were considered and the real progress was simply considered as a swindle,
because it disappeared so quickly.
But many enterprises at that time were no swindle.
They were merely financed in a false way. If at that time a system of Free
Banking had existed, as well as all other economic liberty, then it would, very
probably, have been possible to save a good number of enterprises and it would
have been noted that the rest were not in any larger proportion swindle
attempts than is normally observed in nearly all years of prosperity.
Concerning the USA
crises of 1907 and 1929 - the very bad money laws of the USA were the most
effective cause. I read at that time several dissertations of American authors
who explained that fully.
(Who will dig up these dissertations and publish them, at
least on floppy disks or CD-ROM? I have never come across any of them! - J.Z.,
21.2.03.)
--------------------
You write:
"Are you not overlooking the fact, that a pound note may effect the
exchange of hundreds of pounds s worth of goods?"
In 100 succeeding
sales and purchases every sale - - as far as its price influence is concerned -
- is counter-balanced by the succeeding purchase. What really influences prices
is the first purchase by the fresh issued notes. Moreover, that
influence is counter-balanced it the notes come back to the banker by
"Rückstrom" (reflux - J.Z.), that is, if the banker's debtors repay
their debts. If there are several years of delay, then the effect may be
weakened by the length of time. The delay also means, always, that the repayment
is fulfilled in small amounts and spread over several month or years. That kind
of repayment has an effect very different from the repayment (and coming back
of notes) in great amounts (and rapidly. - J.Z., 21.3.03.).
(J.Z.: The single note, frequently changing hands, is in
effect acting as a clearing process [certificate or account] for the exchange
of 100 different goods and services against each other, in 50 buys and 50
sales, all of them soundly valued, if the value standard used is sound and the
prices are reasonable and agreed upon. Even if it promoted not only 100
exchanges of goods and services for goods and services but, say, 100 million of
them, if that were possible for it, this would still not drive up the prices of
these goods and services, which are, indirectly, "bartered" with the
help of that note. In this multiple exchange process the note would be fully
covered, every time, by the goods or services it would buy or pay for. But
prices would be driven up if 100,000,000 pounds were additionally issued, in
paper pounds, with compulsory acceptance and compulsory value, to "promote
exchanges", and there would be no sufficient reflux or extra demand for
these extra notes provided at the same time, e.g., an extra tax burden, amounting
for the next 3-4 months to 100 million pounds. - J.Z., 21.2.03.)
Jevon's
sun-spot-theory. My darling Jevons didn't contest the drain of gold at the
well known periodic intervals. But he asserted that this drain also was much
influenced by the sun-spots. His diagrams much impressed me. Jevons should have
added that, if there would be no sunspots, then misery caused by the drain of
gold would have been constant, and the drain would at last have driven the
world's money to one centre, not periodically but in a constant flow.
(J.Z.: I dissent here, although for a while the flow of gold
to Fort Knox seemed to confirm this theory. For, in a free gold market, the
"law of fluctuating gold quantities" would still be operating,
achieving a relatively even distribution, although not instantly, even under
gold redemptionism. Without that redemptionism and under gold-value clearing
and gold clauses only the "drain of gold" would have disappeared. -
As long as gold stocks were considered the most important reserves for central
banks, they tended to accumulate there, as costly and unproductive investments
at the expense of all citizens. - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
The effect - - I think - - would have been a monetary
revolution, like the one in Germany, in the years 1921-1924,
where the people simply did no longer obey the Reichsbank
and created their own means of payment - - not in all districts - - but in
many. (If this monetary revolution would have been wide-spread and thorough
enough, it would have ended this inflation almost instantly, instead of letting
it reach an extreme degree. - J.Z., 22.2.03.) Remarkable was, that the greatest
intelligence in creating such new means of payment was not displayed in
Berlin, which (mostly in its own opinion) is considered by many as the "Ville
lumière" of Germany. (*) Austria displayel much more activity in this
sphere, although also by far not enough.
(*) (J.Z.: I left West Berlin in 1959 largely because,
outside of the small Beckerath circle, very few visible and accessible
"lights" remained, even less freedom of action opportunities and even
these were then under threat of being extinguished. Australia seemed then to be
a safe haven and it offered at least some freedom of speech opportunities in
the open air. Moreover, I was getting married and did not want my kids to grow
up in the 900 sq km. "prison" that was West Berlin, surrounded and
constantly threatened in its remaining few liberties by totalitarian communist
regimes. - Berliners hoped for help from the their State or the Western Allies
as they formerly hoped to be saved by the Emperor or by "God". Only a
few dozen could be interested in as just and simle a freedom opportunity as a
free speech centre in the open air and even less in a volunteer militia for the
defence of their individual rights. With such friends, who needs enemies? -
J.Z., 24.5.03.)
--------------------
The coin catalogue
is without any commercial value.
--------------------
Some of your
letters are not yet answered. But I will answer them as soon as possible.
Very
sincerely Your - signed : U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 4. III. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
I did not yet write
to you about the February-issue of the "Individualist".
That you conceded me two pages is an honour which I do appreciate, you do not
know how much.
I hope that my
modest remarks about Mao's system of warfare will get the attention of
some English pacifists. I think that the imitation of Mao's system is the most
powerful weapon a government can apply and that the propaganda for it serves
pacifism as well as - - in the case of England - - her national interests.
Pacifists, who recommend this system to the government under which they live,
can no longer considered as people, whose intention it is to weaken the
military strength of their own country. That is - - I think - - a great
advantage.
But there is a supposition which must be fulfilled: The
government, which applies the system, must inspire confidence. In the last war
some generals tried to apply the system - - long before Mao - - but the
government did not keep the promises of these generals. The last that I learned
about it was from some letters of my friend Dr. Holzhauer from Stalingrad. He
wrote, that the Russians daily summoned the German soldiers there to come to
them and promised them very much. The Germans took that for a mere stratagem.
The fate of the German prisoners of war proved that their distrust was
justified. But I think that the Russian officers at the front fairly
believed that German prisoners of war were well treated and that it was the
Moscow Government that did not keep the promises of the Russian officers. In
the case of England it will require much to achieve that such a distrust will
not arise in future wars. What is here required we will - - I hope - - discuss.
Certain "sacrificii intelletti" must be made. Inter alia, the
prisoners must be conceded a certain economic autonomy, their own banks, and
own notes (not excluded from general circulation, but without cours forcé) and
other things. The English have to choose between such sacrifices
("sacrifices"? - J.Z. It would not cost them anything but would be a win-win
situation. - J.Z., 22.2.03.) and ruin.
If they make
the sacrifice (such concessions to liberty and tolerance! - J.Z.) then it may
be that Russian soldiers themselves will destroy the rocket-missiles now
directed against London and ready to destroy the town within a few hours.
(Fantasy??? Not the opinion is fantastic but the fact.) It may also
happen, that Russian aeroplanes will bring the atomic bombs to London instead
of throwing them on the town. But the soldiers must acquire the confidence that
such a procedure will be the best for Russia as well.
To constitute a provisional Russian government, that
publishes a good political, social, and economic program, one understood
by the man in the street, is obviously essential too. Many will never come over
to the English, but will come, without hesitation, to a Russian government,
established at a place still to be spoken of. You can be sure that English
Bolshevist government is already constituted; therefore: no moralistic
hesitations! (Average men fall at once
asleep once they hear of such themes. England's future depends of possessing
men that do not get sleepy whey they hear such topics discussed.
The Mao-Regime will, nevertheless, soon disappear. Its money
system is no better than Tshiang's system was. A government, that finances itself simply
by printing Assignats will be overthrown like that of Robespierre and in a
similar way. Nationalism will again arise and this time arise against the
Russian planners, of whom now several hundred are already, at work.
(J.Z.: Did he mean here, for or against England, in case of
its occupation? - Alas, without the existence and wide-spread knowledge of a
genuine liberation program all too many dictatorships can persist for all too
long. In his letter writing he was often not as careful as in his written
platform proposals. Thus, if one quoted his letters, then he wanted it made
known that this was just an extract from a letter, that is, not from a
carefully prepared document. - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
The successors of Mao will listen, if England proposes new
(and rightful! - J.Z.) relations. One of the details could be the
payment of imports from England to China by means of payments of Chinese
origin. If in China there exists
an honest Dollar-Market and an honest Pound-Market,
then the bills of exchange drawn on Shanghai firms may be Dollar-Bills or
Pound-Bills. Such bills should not be liable to a redemption in rare metals but
to be usable as means of payment against Shanghai firms. That's a technical
detail seemingly quite outside of considerations concerning England's
safety in a war. But I am convinced that by such technical detail the
successors of Mao can be won as allied against the Soviets. The present system,
by which China must pay in Dollars or in Pounds of American or English origin,
makes an alliance between China and England impossible.
(J.Z.: Even more important might be to finally offer
"equal treaties" to all kinds of voluntary Chinese communities in
England, and the rest of the world, instead of the former "unequal
treaties", that offered only foreigners and their protegee citizens some
independence in China but denying it to Chinese there and elsewhere. The
special and unfavourable treatment meted out by "foreign devils" to
Chinese people is still not forgotten there and it was one factor that helped
Communists get gain power there and to maintain it. B. discussed that at other
occasions, but one should always keep that aspect in mind. Make citizenship
quite voluntary and exterritorially autonomous - everywhere and the temporarily
still continuing dictatorships will no longer be a major problem for long. -
J.Z., 22.2.03.)
Why not create a
"Society of Friends of China" (a free China! - consisting of many
free Chinese societies, all with voluntary members only! - J.Z., 24.5.03.) as
Russia (the Soviets! - J.Z.) creates in all countries "Societies of the
Friends of Russia" (exists in Berlin, too)? (Rather, a Society for Friends
of Russia under Communism! Their opposites have not yet been sufficiently
established, e.g. in form of exterritorially autonomous communities of
volunteers, in all countries, for all the minorities that were suppressed in
Soviet Russia and partly still are suppressed there even now, after its all too
incomplete "liberation". - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
If such a society
expressly declares - - what would merely correspond to the facts - - that it
would not recommend birth control for China (it may that during the last few
years 100 million Chinese were killed by war, famine and diseases, so that
China now is certainly under-populated) but recommends to her a
sound monetary system, an external trade as free as possible for China and
demanded from every government the repeal of every race discrimination
(unlimited immigration for Chinese to all parts of the world if they
desire to emigrate after the reforms the new society has to present), that may
be the beginning of a new era in Chinese-English relations.
-------------------
One example, how
important may be the above hinted technical detail.
In one of his
speeches Goebbels (in the year 1934) said: Germany wants as many
colonies as are necessary to supply her with all the goods that can't be
produced in Germany, and why? Only in her own colonies is Germany able to pay with her own money. Of a
commercial system by which a country pays (J.Z.: A hand-written note that B.
wanted to insert here is so cut off at the bottom of my photocopy that it is
illegible. I presume he wanted to say something like: "for imports with
assignments upon its own goods and services" - J.Z.) with its own monies
(competitively issued! - J.Z.) Goebbels knew nothing. The press did not dare to
write about such things, although certainly many of the older editors knew
quite well how such a system is possible. But Schacht prohibited publishing
articles about new commercial questions without the written permission of the
Reichsbank. Important is, that the ignorance of Goebbels (and all other loading
Nazis about the means of payment in external trade did here obviously prepared
a war. The invasion to Russia in 1942 was, I am convinced, also caused
by the consideration, that a subdued Ukraine had to accept German marks as a
means of payment.
(J.Z.: A "Free" Trade without full monetary,
clearing and value standard freedom is not a sufficiently Free Trade and
thus brings about, again and again, "protectionist" interventionism
and monopolies and international strife. Japan was even more obviously
blockaded by the West - and its own "protectionists", so that its military
men came to believe they had to militarily conquer markets for it, markets
which Japananese producers and merchants could have peacefully
"conquered" with her clearing certificates, buying much in the world
and being covered by her goods ready for export. How much more of a
"Japanese Miracle" would have occurred after WW II, if at least then
Japanese people had been freed to help themselves and the World in this way? -
J.Z., 24.5.03.)
--------------------
Everybody, who read
your explanations on pages 5/6 of the "Individualist" will admit that
now a Chinese-English society, as above described, is psychologically
possible. Before it was not. Then everybody in England considered the (seeming)
overpopulation as the main cause of China's miseries. But that you attributed
the new situation of Malthusianism to me, instead to Prof. Edwin Cannan
- - oh, oh!!! I was somewhat frightened!
It is my real conviction that Cannan did
scientifically kill the old Malthusianism and created the real suppositions of
better relations between England and China. As long as Englishmen recommend a
birth-control to Chinese, they will have not only the old Chinese manners and
traditions as opponents but truth and facts too. Now they may disregard
such arguments and do so with an easy conscience. (That's all most important, I
think.)
(J.Z.: Already by getting all Chinese parents, now
threatened by compulsory abortions, on the side of natural liberty, the
Communist regime could be overthrown, fast and with little or no bloodshed.
Monetary and financial freedom would allow many more Chinese to support
themselves. But those, who have still some doubts on this, should be offered
Free Migration as well, by & to the rest of the World, not only Free Trade,
and the numerous diverse groups in China should be offered full exterritorial
autonomy, first via corresponding governments in exile, all for those who had
managed to escape or lived already in the "West" and wanted to live
overseas in their particular Chinese way of life, and for all people still in
Mainland China, who, in the future would want to live under their self-chosen
and various governments and free societies, all exterritorially autonomous, including
communist and socialist ones. But this would also require that the rest of the
World would be similarly liberated. Otherwise, refugees from Communist China
might end up e.g. in Australian concentration camps for illegal immigrants, for
years, only to be finally deported back to China, as was also a Chinese woman,
highly pregnant, whose was then compulsorily aborted in China. Some people
would rather imprison innocents or murder them than think and consider and
grant the freedom alternatives. - J.Z., 24.5.03.)
-----------------
Article: A German
Army, page 3/4 of Ind.
You write:
"Moreover, Germany cannot be denied an army for all time, etc.". I
think the matter is of little importance. The important side of the problem is,
that the Eastern part of the Tri-zone's frontiers is defended. I think it is
not defended if there are less than 2 million soldiers with their equipment.
Whether the soldiers are Germans or others is - - militarily - - not important.
(Here he should have at least mentioned the rightful militia alternative to
standing armies. - and also that many less defenders would be needed if they
were prepared to accept and help to fully liberate many millions of deserters
and other refugees in the West, thus making them very fast self-supporting and
prosperous without becoming a burden to others. - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
As an old adherent
of Tucker I cannot concede rights to a government and such rights
not a fortiori. But any German
individual citizen wishes to contribute something to defend himself against the
Soviets, then he should - - I think - - have the right to do so. To tell the
truth: Voluntarily very few will contribute anything. As in all countries of
the world, at the present era in history, very few like to participate actively
in a war. On the other hand, they do desire seriously desire personal
independence and abhor Soviet suppression. As long as such a state of
affairs prevails, conscription is
justified. Also experience teaches that conscription for such purposes finds no
resistance among the people. I wrote to you about this matter in my letter of
18.II., page 9.
-------------------
At the present
state of minds, I would not recommend to accept other Germans to an army than
those, who voluntarily apply for service. The dismantlings (Demontagen - J.Z.)
are not yet forgotten. That will require a long time or extraordinary events.
Deliberate yourself: There are men who saw how many lost their job by
dismantling, or lost their jobs themselves. Now they shall fight as the allies
of those to whom they ascribe the responsibility for the dismantlings. (The man
in the street still applies to subjects the responsibility for that
which the government did, that taxed the subject. That is taught in the Bible
as the normal method of judging responsibility and it still prevails, although
not for biblical reasons. In any case, at the moment German soldiers got
by conscription would not be the best allies.) The English did not consider
French proverb: "Les ennemis des nos ennemis sont nos amis."
------------------
Zwangskurs.
You say in your letter of 16. II.: "I wrote that a general rise of prices
can occur if bankers make more loans (or at longer dates) than the resources of
the country can stand."
You are right, but
where is the limit? Take a country X, populated by 100,000 Englishmen of the
type which colonised America. Suppose all resources are suddenly destroyed by
an earthquake. I assert: Although the country is without any resources,
it is able to absorb any quantity of loans. By the loans the resources are
created. If the government in good and follows the principles often explained
in the "Individualist", then it will call-in immigrants, and, at
last, the country may become a city of 10 million inhabitants, through
the loans, and then the country is a fortiori able to absorb further loans.
Although there certainly exists a limit, I cannot see it. In every case
the limit is beyond the world's possibility to grant loans.
If the loans are
applied to construct roads and to improve the industrial plant, the effect must
be a decrease of prices.
But if the loans
are granted in the form you suppose, that is, in the form of granting notes to
the debtor for the amount borrowed and remaining in circulation until the
debtor must repay the loan, then the possibility to absorb loans is very
restricted.
-------------------
Very
faithfully Yours - signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
U. v. Beckerath, … 5.
III. 1950.
Dear Mr.
Meulen,
by your kindness I received yesterday:
1.) "Truth" of 17. II. 50,
2.) "Economist" of 18. II. 50,
3.) "National News-Letter" of 17. II. 50,
4.) "City Press" of 10. II. 50,
5.) "The Scots Independent," of December 1949.
Many thanks. All issues are of great interest. In every
issue one may state that the necessary mental revolution in England has now
begun. We all hope it may not yet be too late. The election's results are also
a symptom and - - insofar as I
myself am concerned - - disappointed me in an agreeable manner. Before the
elections I estimated Labour's majority at about 6o % (as did Stephen King-Hall
in his issue of 26. I. 1950). This victory of 23. II. is a defeat - -
under the prevailing conditions - - as many will have noticed. Individualism
awakes!
---------------------
India. I
enclose a copy of a very interesting letter which Zander wrote to me and to
Rittershausen. From that copy you may learn that Sanyal expects and
would like a war with Pakistan. Sanyal is an
extraordinary man. I saw him in the year 1929 at Rittershausen's house
at Zehlendorf (suburb of Berlin). We had a long discussion. We asked him for
his program. A better Civil Law, possibilities to better the lower classes'
standard of living, and the many other well known Indian problems. His answer
always was: That's of no importance at all. Firstly the English must leave
India. Everything else is then easily and quickly done. Now he and many
men like him, whose mind is completely filled up with primitive nationalism,
see that their nationalism can contribute nothing to any serious reform.
And what they do now: They do not change their views - - that would not correspond to human nature -
- they exaggerate nationalism to
the utmost possible limit, and the first step to it is a war. That's the
history of all revolutionary governments.
--------------
In Truth of
17. II. 50., page 170, I read a "Letter to the editor" of R. R. Cooke.
The letter begins:
"Sir - Is
there the slightest hope for a world economy built on an artificially valued
standard such as gold - the most useless metal and, therefore, the least in
real worth?" - Mr. Cooke
continues: "… Value in terms of the essentials to life alone would give
practical obedience to the natural laws of the universe, etc."
Mr. Cooke does not
say whether he will prohibit to valuate things publicly in terms of gold
ounces, so as it is already prohibited in Russia and probably in other
countries organized by Soviets. At the moment nobody prevents him from valuing
anything in terms of the "essentials of life", so as he understands
these essentials (there are 100 opinions about that among 100 intelligent men),
and to publish his valuations. But I would remind - - if I would see him - -
that the right statistical method to valuate in "essentials of life"
- - provided these essentials were known - -
was unknown before 1923, when Irving Fisher published his "Making
of Index Numbers". So one may say that before the year 1923 it was
technically impossible to valuate things exactly enough in "essentials of
life". The differences in the result of the many until 1923 used, or by
the best experts proposed, methods of valuation are so great that the valuating
simply in ounces of gold would have produced much less differences and - - if
the matter would be discussed for the purpose of applying the valuation in
"essentials of life" in practice - - the valuation of anything in
terms of gold ounces would have been found to be the least evil at the present
state of economies and statistics. Mr. Cooke does not say, that he would like
to prohibit the bullion market, but my impression is that he would like this.
My opinion is that the bullion market, at the present state
of affairs, is the only means to find out the relative best value of a gold
ounce and that this value is - - still now - - the best value to serve an a
standard for other values. Other people may get and profess another opinion and
I - - as adherent of Tucker - - defend their right to use in their own affairs
their own standard of value.
But I claim - - as adherent of Tucker - - for myself the
right to use, in my own affairs gold ounces, valued at a free bullion
market (the word used in the sense of 1913) as a standard of value. I also
claim the right to go to the free bullion market and to sell and buy there,
within my capacity, and to offer and to
demand gold ounces in forms and quantities as I myself think fit, provided only
that I act in full honesty and publicity. That publicity would include that if
I offer gold ounces, which I do not possess but merely hope to possess
in the future, I would tell that openly. The same principle shall be applied
for the payment for gold ounces demanded by me. If I do not as yet possess the expected means of payment, but
merely hope to possess them in the future, I must also tell it freely and
openly, if I will remain honest.
I am afraid that
such principles do not agree to 100 % with your explanations about an
invariable unit of value in "Free Banking".
But certainly we agree in that:
1 ) The Principle and the technique you propose should not
be imposed upon anybody, so that he will be punished it he does not
apply it or if he resists its application.
2.) The ideal of an invariable unit is very good, should be
emphasised by every economist and the economist should admit that the value of
a gold ounce at a free Bullion Market is by far not the best theoretically to
be aspired to.
3.) At the present state of monetary science there prevail
great differences in what an invariable unit should consist. Every party is firmly convinced that its
plan is best and should be generally accepted. In this situation everybody must
be free to select his own unit at his own risk and expense and entitled to all
advantages of the unit, if it proves to be a good unit. Such a right is a very
essential right of man and citizen, not. inferior in rank to other rights
proclaimed 1789.
If the following is
not right, please, correct me.
Your plan supposes the decision of one man (the best
to be found) as a standard for his customers. This man is the banker who, in
the interest of his customers and the people ready to accept his notes, fixes
the amount of the notes to be issued. The amount being of great influence to
the value-relation of notes to other things, one can say: h e fixes the
value of the notes.
Will you concede to
people who know, from monetary history, to what extent the best educated and
most honest and most able men may err, the privilege to use as their value unit
the market value of a gold ounce? The adherents confess that, in their opinion,
such a value is no more than the least evil to be found at the moment and that
it is far from realising an ideal.
-----------------
The article in the
Economist of 18. II. 50., "Agreement through Strength", is one of the
best I ever read in the Economist. The author takes the thing - - danger of
atomic bombs - - so serious as it must be taken and he confesses - - which
honours him much - - that nobody has serious
program. He says: "What are the next steps? Where can the West increase
and deploy its resources with greatest defensive effect? These are more
urgent questions than whether or not
the Communists are ready to sign - - and
break - - a limited atomic pact."
I do think that it
is the moral duty of every one of us to contribute to an answer to the author's
questions.
(See my "An
ABC against Nuclear War", in PEACE PLANS 16 & 17, now at: www.panarchism.info/ - J.Z.)
Firstly is to be stated: The government will do nothing,
probably because it can do nothing. Here is given a very similar
situation as existed in the year 1812 in Prussia, when a number of intelligent,
courageous men, well judging the situation, said:
Our government will do nothing against Napoleon. What can we
do?
You know, that one
of the successes of their conferences was the Convention of Tauroggen,
concluded on 30. 12.1812 between the Prussian General Yorck and the
Russian General Diebitsch. (The celebrated Clausewitz - - author of
"Vom Kriege" - - the best contribution [I think] to the natural
history of war and far from glorifying it - - helped to prepare the
convention.)
In England a
similar Union should be tried as was undertaken in the year 1812 in Prussia.
This Union should discuss:
1.) A method of warfare in the style of Mao during the last
two years
2.) Quite detailed provisions for the treatment of those who
are won by Mao's methods.
3.) The formation of a provisional Russian government and a
good program for it.
4.) Methods of collaboration between that government and the
Union.
5.) Possibility to use atomic bombs, which the Soviets
constructed, in the next civil war between the Soviets and Russian
revolutionaries, so that the present possessors of the bombs (who are soldiers
and officers not the men of the Kremlin) put them at the disposal of the
revolutionaries. (All ABC mass murder and mass destruction devices
are not anti-government weapons but anti-people
"weapons". As such they are quite unsuitable to fight a civil or
revolutionary war, or a liberation war. Later B. recommended their unilateral
destruction. Obviously, they could not serve to liberate the
"proletarians" - neither in the East nor in the West. Nor can they be
rightfully and efficiently used to defeat totalitarian or other despotic regimes.
Even a knife or a handgun would be a better weapon for this. - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
6.) Methods to keep all promises made in the warfare by
Mao's methods.
----------------
A man like Kenneth
de Courcy should be invited. I believe that to be very important. The
author of the mentioned article in the Economist should be invited too. Both
will bring others and, perhaps men as good as themselves.
- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
I hope you will
have read in "City Press" F. W. Hoare's interesting article
"Romance of Private Banking", where H. gives illustrations of
ci-devant banking. He does not mention the Act of 1844. I think you are
the only man in England who is aware that this Act violated an essential right
of man and citizen: The right to issue his own notes, combined with the right
to accept or to refuse notes of others.
----------------
Alexander says on
page 12: "I have always taken the view that convertibility was of
paramount importance".
A. does not say what
kind of convertibility he means. If he means convertibility on the old bad
basis of a stock of the matter into which the pound is to be converted (a stock
of gold coins, of Dollars, etc.), economists must insist that such a condition
is technically impossible or - - what means the same - - possible only for a
very limited time and for a very limited amount.
The true
opportunity to convert is an honest exchange market. It seems,
Alexander, though certainly one of the best English economists, does not see
that.
----------------
Scots Independent. It seems your article did not get the
resonance it should have received. Bad for Scotland!
At page four the
Editor says about my modest remarks concerning some effects of devaluation:
"The position
in the opinion of competent authorities is different to-day. There is now a
shortage of agricultural products and raw-materials, and the U.K. must buy them
in a sellers' market, and the prices will tend rapidly to increase against us,
even excluding any Government action and Marshall aid."
How did things
change in the few weeks since Mr. G. wrote that, in the whole world, more
victuals are offered than demanded! (Commercially demanded - - that's true - -
not physiologically wanted, which would be another kind of consideration. But
it is very probable that, if every want could be transformed into demand,
then, also, the offer would be greater than the demand.)
In this year, the
USA will reduce their area under wheat by 17 % and why? Too much wheat in the
world!
Food and
raw-materials may become dearer in England as a consequence of devaluation, and
in the long run they certainly will, but they will appear dearer only if their
price is expressed in paper-pounds, not if expressed in gold ounces.
To prevent any
scarcity of victuals or raw-materials there is a very simple way: Let the
people who wish to import both, to England or Scotland, import them without
limitation or any control. Let them - - and that is the essential point - - be
paid by means of payment of English or Scotch origin, not convertible in
the old sense of the word, but to be used as means of payment for English or
Scotch of goods. Then let the men, who get these means of payments for our
imports, reflect upon the best possible use of these means of payment. Under
the present conditions in the whole world, where the necessity to export is so
great, that country wins that becomes first aware of the true nature of that
necessity. In the USA the necessity is the greatest. The USA would - - at the
present state of affairs - - even consent to cancel all her claims resulting
from previous exports, if that would be a condition to export further. Why not
use such a mentality as long as it exists? (One day the Americans will become
aware of how imprudent they have been.)
But - - say Scotch
as well as English and all others: Imports without limitations and controls???
Rather perish!!! And they would not listen to the system which would be the
basis for this - - it's too inconvenient!
----------------
In the latest
commercial treaty between Bonn and Hague there is a provision that, upon
demand, imports of cauliflower must be stopped, if Bonn thinks that German
cauliflower-peasants suffer from too strong a competition. Self-blockade!
(J.Z.: Not really a self-blockade for the German
cauliflower consumers, who would prefer cheaper cauliflower. It is rather these
German consumers who are blockaded by the German cauliflower growers, with the
help of the German government! - J.Z., 22.2.03.)
Very faithfully
Yours signed: U. v. Beckerath.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Another at least 65
mistakes were found and corrected, as a result of compiling a
"summary" of 22 pages. - J.Z.,
10.6.03. You are welcome to correct the rest yourself. Partly I can blame my
scanning system - but not for my typos and my spelling and proof-reading &
other failures. The scanning mixes up e.g., Madame Roland with Madame Poland,
public with pubic, loading with leading, he with be, in with is, etc. &
Word's underlining do not discover such mistakes. Become such a discoverer, if
you like. But I could try for the rest of my life to discover all such mistakes
and still might fail. - J.Z., 10.6.03.
____________________________________________________________________________________________