FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Bishop Williamson on Economics
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Third Position

Eleison Comments LXXXI

When I am out driving somewhere in unknown territory and I come to a fork in the road, and I take the road to the left and it turns out to be a dead end, and I take the road to the right and it turns out to be a dead end, then unless I give up going anywhere, will I not turn back to the last previous fork or junction and look for any other road than the one I just came down?


To save "capitalism" in the USA, the outgoing Republican Administration has resorted to such a massive degree of Government intervention and control as to resemble more and more closely a "communist" government. And, just before the incoming Democrat Administration comes in, it gives all the appearances of resorting to the same "communist" solution for the "capitalist" problem. But ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, has not Communism been evidently a loser? In which case do not both Administrations resemble the motorist who turns from one dead end to another?


Of course just as diehard Communists will claim that "true" Communism was never given a fair trial, so many believers in "Capitalism" will today claim that only abuses of the system are forcing it to morph into Government control. But just as the worst horrors of Communism do not contradict, but follow from, its basic principles, so, given poor old human nature, was not free enterprise Capitalism bound to morph into that finance Capitalism now obliging the Governments to take over? After all, cannot Capitalism, named from capital - money - be defined as a maximizing of freedom for all citizens to make as much money as they will and can? And how could that not end in the stronger devouring the weaker until they become TBTF: too big to fail?


Then in what direction might one look for a third road, leading to neither implicit nor explicit atheistic materialism? How about the Sermon on the Mount? - "You cannot serve God and Mammon"... "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things (economic goods) shall be added unto you"...(Mt. VI, 24, 33). But who wants the solutions of God? Kyrie eleison.

La Reja, Argentina

Posted by Bishop Richard Williamson at 7:44 PM 
Labels: Capitalism, Distributism, economics, Financial Crisis


Saturday, June 27, 2009
Eleison Comments CIII: 81/121 Re-Structuring

Beginning on August 1st, Dinoscopus will switch to a subscriber-only format. If you'd like to receive access, simply send an email with your email address (nothing else required) to dinoscopus@gmail.com. This is the second of five reminders. Please note that this is not H.E.'s actual email, which is private, but we are always happy to pass on any email, hate-filled or otherwise, to him that is directed here.


A continued reminder, True Restoration Press is offering a $100/$130 (US/International) package of all four volumes of Letters from the Rector, as well as the Liberal Illusion and We Call Thee Blessed. Get them while they last! - S.H.


Tomorrow, or the day after, there is hardly a box outside of which it will not be necessary to think. In Church and world, the mentalities and structures of so-called “Western civilization” are collapsing around our ears. Still the mass of Western souls are preferring to slumber on in their audio-visual dream, but reality is closing in all the time – they may awake not before they are shackled into the New World Order.

The USA has for nearly a century acted as the shield and sword-bearer of “Western civilization”. Now its financial, economic and political power structures are melting down in a welter of greed, corruption, selfishness and dissolution slung between Wall Street, New York, and Washington, DC. However -- let it never be said too often – “We the people” have only ourselves to blame. We have wanted the cause: godless materialism. Now we must live with the effects: the final breakdown of fractional reserve “banking”, of paper “money”, of democratic “politics”.

City structures are crumpling. In Flint, Michigan, original home of General Motors presently employing 8,000 local people where once it employed 79,000 and now bankrupt, local politicians are pioneering an idea to save their dwindling city: raze entire districts and return the land to nature. This idea so appeals to the Federal Government that another 50 cities have been earmarked as potential candidates for salvation by the bulldozer, including Detroit, Philadelphia and Baltimore.

State structures are failing. In California, Controller John Chiang said a few days ago that if State lawmakers cannot quickly solve California’s 24 billion dollar deficit, then next week he will have to pay State debts with paper promises to pay. “Unfortunately”, said he, “the State’s inability to balance the check-book will now mean short-changing taxpayers, local governments and small businesses”. It is easy to imagine how these will react, but it is not easy to imagine how the budget deficit will be solved.

As for our national structures, if we will not acquiesce to their being merged into the international New World Order, then surely a Third World War will be engineered to persuade us, starting with an 81/121 (a 9/11 squared) ! Yet all these collapses pale in comparison with Vatican II, because it was the Catholic Church that was upholding “Western civilization”. If the Catholic collapse is not soon reversed by the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then one must wonder if the healthiest elements in the Church will not need re-structuring as an underground resistance movement. Kyrie eleison.


London, England
Posted by The Dinoscopus
I wonder if the economies of Michigan & California can be rightly called capitalist.
Quote: Of course just as diehard Communists will claim that "true" Communism was never given a fair trial, so many believers in "Capitalism" will today claim that only abuses of the system are forcing it to morph into Government control. But just as the worst horrors of Communism do not contradict, but follow from, its basic principles, so, given poor old human nature, was not free enterprise Capitalism bound to morph into that finance Capitalism now obliging the Governments to take over?

Somewhat of a straw man argument.  Capitalists claim that we abandoned capitalism.  It really started with the Fed Reserve being given monopoly power over paper money (definitely not free market capitalism), the national income tax preventing "voting with your feet", then we had the roaring twenties set off by Fed pumping, resulting in the huge crash known as the Depression.  Then we had Hoover, FDR, and the New Deal, which saw the 10th amendment completely gutted, all gold seized and replaced with devalued paper money,  and income tax rates going to 90%.  (Certainly not free market capitalism).  We had further government controls instituted during WWII, the abandoning of silver in 1965 from our money, the War on Poverty,  and then abandoning gold exchange for foreign exchange in the early 70s.  Recently we had the Fed slashing rates in 1999, setting off the Dot Com bubble, raising rates dramatically in 2000 causing the Dot Com bust, slashing rates again in 2001-2002 down to 1%, setting off the real estate bubble, followed by a 500% increase to 5%, causing the housing collapse.  Throw in Federal sponsorship of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the rating agencies of S&P, Fitch, and Moody's, and you certainly have abandoned free market capitalism.

Quote: After all, cannot Capitalism, named from capital - money - be defined as a maximizing of freedom for all citizens to make as much money as they will and can? And how could that not end in the stronger devouring the weaker until they become TBTF: too big to fail?
Finally, a point is made.  It's like a drop of rain in a desert when reading the posts of Belloc.  Back to it.  If the strong will devour the weak, then you should see it locally.  However, whenever I open up the yellow pages looking for a contractor or vendor, I am presented with many choices.  If I need a plumber, then I have 30 to choose from in my small town.  How come the "strong" plumber didn't devour up all the "weak" plumbers?  How exactly is the "strong" plumber supposed to drive out the "weak" plumber anyway?  And if there is a way to do it, then how come the "strong" plumber doesn't execute this strategy?

Now there is a good point here, a subject of much debate.  That is natural monopolies.  The anarcho-capitalist would have no regulation of monopolies, while the plain Jane capitalists favor regulating monopolies.  I fall into the latter camp.  The key advantage of capitalism is competition.  It holds Original Sin in check.  So a monopoly will not have competition, and therefore it will tend towards "evil" -- poor service, high prices, etc...

One more thing is usury.  Most capitalists probably don't have a problem with usury.  I strongly oppose usury.  So maybe we need to define a third branch, the Catholic capitalist.