I know this will probably not be well received or completely understood, but it’s the time to say it. Social Credit is only a reform/theory like Keynesianism or neo-liberal economics both of which also being only reforms/theories have changed and will be changed. To be sure it is a far superior and more insightful theory than any other mere economic theory and in fact it is as Douglas said, ” “a policy of a philosophy” and if WW II had not intervened I believe it may have won the day economically and the rest of the 20th century would probably have been much less stressful and so likely much less bloody. So it is superior, mostly because the philosophical concept underlying it is absolutely stellar. But it was also much more empirical and scientific than all of the abstract falderal that economic theories usually fall into, mostly because Douglas being an accountant and efficiency expert recognized double entry bookkeeping as the underlying infrastructure for all of commerce and that the pricing, money and accounting systems were all digital, that is equal amounts of payments and prices, debits and credits sum to zero. Hence the compensated retail price.
But Social Credit still did not completely break free from either the current economic theories it arose from or from its current cultural paradigms. It recognized that Debt Only was the current paradigm and that monetary grace as in gifting was the new one and that was huge, but it still fell back into the erroneous idea of general equilibrium which led to most of its adherents clinging to a mere static/statistical filling of “the Gap” instead of making it overflow and hence not only creating a truly free flowing state of the economy but raising the theory to a paradigm changing inversion of the problematic duality of the scarcity ratio of total individual incomes generally available to spend to total costs and so prices.
Abundant Inversion/transformation is probably the primary signature of paradigm changes…in this case individual monetary scarcity to abundance….precisely like the small minded egocentric terra-centrism to the expansive scientific understanding of helio-centrism, the circumstancial uncertainty of nomadism to the more secure individual abundance of agriculture and homesteading, the time consuming and slow process of handwriting to the abundant ability to communicate via mechanical printing and the dominating and indirect monopoly on the sacraments that the Church demanded to a direct and personal relationship with God of The Reformation.
So even though it was a far superior theory as per above it still remained a theory…not the permanently progressive event known as a paradigm change…..and this is mostly by not having as fully fleshed out an understanding the natural philosophical concept underlying Social Credit itself…grace. Grace is abundance, freedom/free flowingness, the ultimate wisdom/integration of the truths in a duality so much so that a thirdness greater oneness arises out of that twoness.
Finally, because Social Credit did not rise to the level of paradigm change it was not able to fulfill its actual philosophical legacy and help to further rise to the level of new ethic/zeitgeist, that is, from the current one of the egocentric will to profit and power via systems and data-knowledge and make the transition to the new zeitgeist of the direct personal/experiential will to freedom via the integrative contemplation of the truths in opposites known as Wisdom, again, whose pinnacle concept is grace.