Judge Napolitano and the Pope
#41
Hey Austenbosten, guess what? Not all Catholics are distributists. And that doesn't mean we aren't economically well versed or well read on Catholic Social Teaching. While I wouldn't call distrubitism "Catholic marxism," I would call it unfeasible and economically impossible. We don't live in a medieval world of guilds and sheep. Judge Napalitnao has offered a perfectly concise Catholic case against the Pope's remarks, which aren't even distributist. Before you accuse us of parroting Limbaugh (who is by no means an economic expert), don't just parrot Chesterton and Belloc who weren't economists either.
Reply
#42
(12-07-2013, 03:25 AM)jonbhorton Wrote: But the problem is some seem to wish to change reality's description into impossible-under-x.

We are not promised a Utopia in Christendom until Heaven.

In other words, we WILL always have the poor with us and no system can change that.

Marxism under another title is still Marxist in principle. And FWIW, based on my reading of Traditional writers, poverty in actuality can actually be a preference.

I shudder at temporal success, personally.
There is a difference between a mature man or woman choosing poverty for spiritual and religious reasons, and living in grinding economic poverty with all the social, cultural and educational poverty that accompanies such a state... especially when children are involved.

One is holy poverty, the other is deprivation.
Reply
#43
(12-07-2013, 02:20 PM)Tim Wrote: Capitalism wasn't infiltrated by Marxists, Capitalism funded them. All of this pseudo-scientific economics is a Judaeo-Masonic conspiracy no matter the iteration.
Remember Hegel; thesis, antithesis, and synthesis ?? Why do some Catholics condemn Chesterton and Belloc and term them socialists. The Church from the time of S. Paul has gathered the moola and sent it to another in need. Is that socialism or charity ??  It's definitely redistribution for sure !

One would think after hundreds of years of Jewish financiers and Protestant Royalty and Dynastic families running the banks and finance, Catholics would want to try their own way.

tim

It is charity. It does not imply state intervention. Capitalism is not inherently an Ayn Rand monopoly. Capitalism has produced far more success than any Chesterton-Belloc fantasy system.
Reply
#44
(12-07-2013, 03:39 PM)austenbosten Wrote: Nowhere is there a nation that exists without regulations and laws affecting the economy

Somalia.
Reply
#45
(12-07-2013, 03:46 PM)Clare Brigid Wrote:
(12-07-2013, 03:39 PM)austenbosten Wrote: Nowhere is there a nation that exists without regulations and laws affecting the economy

Somalia.

The Somalia putdown is getting old. No one, including the Jude, is advocating anarcho-capitalism. The distributist crowd seem to think that to be a capitalist, one must support 100% Randian/Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism.
Reply
#46
(12-07-2013, 03:41 PM)vtcatholic Wrote: Hey Austenbosten, guess what? Not all Catholics are distributists. And that doesn't mean we aren't economically well versed or well read on Catholic Social Teaching. While I wouldn't call distrubitism "Catholic marxism," I would call it unfeasible and economically impossible. We don't live in a medieval world of guilds and sheep. Judge Napalitnao has offered a perfectly concise Catholic case against the Pope's remarks, which aren't even distributist. Before you accuse us of parroting Limbaugh (who is by no means an economic expert), don't just parrot Chesterton and Belloc who weren't economists either.

Did I say all Catholics were distrbutists? No, however it is the Social Teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. So perhaps you should calm down before placing words in my mouth and accusing me of saying things I never said.

As for Distributism being unfeasible and economically impossible because we don't live in a medieval world of guilds and sheep. Well we don't live in a world were businesses actually go bankrupt when making bad business practices and every trade benefits all parties equally. Despite mocking Distributism as a "medieval-fantasy" it actually exists in the contemporary world in the Mondragon Corporation and elements of Distributism exist in the Taiwanese economy, but keep supporting your views by leveling and disparaging others.

As for dismissing Chesterton and Belloc because "they weren't economists" niether was Ayn Rand but that doesn't stop people from looking to her for economic thought.
Reply
#47
All right let's call a truce. I admit I get ticked off pretty good having tons of real world experience in medium size companies and listening to "book smarts". Let's put each of our prejudices aside and work together and find a better way forward.

I propose that "free trade" did not exist until after 1972, when Nixon took away the silver certificates. Prior to that we did not export very much, Pat Buchanan in one of his books cites 5% of GDP. I do not remember any international business until the mid-80's with the global push for SI Metrics.

Prior to that America made stuff and we sold to ourselves. In Republican parlance of that time we pulled ourselves up by our own bootstraps. Taxes were unbelievably high then, but some how small business kept multiplying and employing folks with real pay while the Banks were not allowed to invest and play on Wall Street.

Banks were not allowed to buy other banks, and their business was lending working money to small businesses as they grew. This system was closer to Distributism than Capitalism.

So what I'm trying to convey is Capitalism as it is now has everything to do with globalization and reducing the work force. It had nothing to do with growing a robust America. Now you may say this isn't Capitalism but that means it's as untried as Distributism.

what do you think ??

tim
Reply
#48
The Pope wants to talk about the Gospel. I think it is interesting that the Americans want to talk about the economy and the French want to talk about the Moslems.
??? ??? ???
Reply
#49
(12-08-2013, 08:07 AM)Poche Wrote: The Pope wants to talk about the Gospel. I think it is interesting that the Americans want to talk about the economy and the French want to talk about the Moslems.
??? ??? ???

Strange Days Indeed!

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)