An argument for the compatibility of Catholicism and anarchism

[edwest2]

Anarchy is not compatible with anything Catholic.

Peace,
Ed

 

[MarcusAndreas]

All you’ve contributed to this thread are meaningless sophisms that only serve to show how ignorant you are about the subject.

 

[sent_by_God]

I am not critiquing you, I am stating a fact, or at least what you said. And I say this becauze I am three times your age and still learning myself, bit also looking back at my younger self and recalling how I was once like you.

You were critiquing me.

And those who prefer having some government–will you force them to live without it?

No.
St Francis:

I don’t know about the precise numbers here, but accepting them for the sake of argument, that means the US government is doing 1/3 good. My thought is that the good should be preserved rather than thrown out with the bathwater. Destruction of the whole would lead to an even worse situation than we currently have.

Destruction of something that 1/3 good and 2/3 bad would improve our situation.

Since I am a Catholic, you cannot refute what I say with your singular theology.

I can refute you as long as you cannot find a flaw in my arguments.

Anyway, Sent by, I think that we have reaches the end of our abilities to explain ourselves. My best may not have been very good. Don’t let this discourage you–it is my policy to bow out after I have explained because I used to think I had to keep on going til the other person was convinced and that kind of drove me and others crazy. Keep coming back to CAF with questions.

Very well. We may cease the discussion.

 

[Reep]

Hi Reep!

Hi Saint! I just thought I should chime in to give sent-by-God a hand. Tough name to live up to, BTW.

For anyone who is interested, the facebook page Catholic Libertarians has generated a lot of interest in recent months. The guy who owns the page is seriously Catholic and seriously libertarian.

There is none of the “economically conservative, but socially liberal” baloney that many think constitutes libertarianism (or libertarian anarchism). It’s not about greed, not about individualism. It’s about finding ways to get along without resort to governmental violence. Really nothing more than that.

 

[CrossofChrist]

*1897 "Human society can be neither well-ordered nor prosperous unless it has some people invested with legitimate authority to preserve its institutions and to devote themselves as far as is necessary to work and care for the good of all."15

By “authority” one means the quality by virtue of which persons or **institutions make laws and give orders to men and expect obedience from them. ***

Obviously modern states (for the most part–some states like Malta or Chile might be exempt) make it hard for a just social structure to exist. It’s an example of a legitimate authority acting in an illegitimate way.

The apostles didn’t call for an abolition of the Roman Empire even when the State was burning Christians by the thousands, in fact they were told to pray for them and to be obedient to them.

Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed - St. Paul

 

[Reep]

1897 "Human society can be neither well-ordered nor prosperous unless it has some people invested with legitimate authority to preserve its institutions and to devote themselves as far as is necessary to work and care for the good of all."15

By “authority” one means the quality by virtue of which persons or institutions make laws and give orders to men and expect obedience from them.

You raise a great point about authority being able to “give orders to men and expect obedience from them.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), paragraph 1930, explains why governments use violence to compel obedience. It is because they neither respect nor protect fundamental human rights:

1. Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy. If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. . . .

Show me an authority that obtains obedience of its members through respect rather than violent compulsion and I–as a member–will respect and obey it willingly. The Catholic Church is one such authority that comes to mind. Most modern governments do not come to mind.

How to recognize an unjust law.

 

[CrossofChrist]

You raise a great point about authority being able to “give orders to men and expect obedience from them.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), paragraph 1930, explains why governments use violence to compel obedience. It is because they neither respect nor protect fundamental human rights:

1. Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy. If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. . . .

1930 is talking about when governments abuse their authority. But it’s not saying that because they are making illegitimate “laws” they themselves are illegitimate and shouldn’t be obeyed. We can’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

As CCC 1899 says quoting Scripture:

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

 

[sent_by_God]

CrossOfChrist:

… and those that exist have been instituted by God.

You claim that God instituted a government which slaughters 1,000,000+ babies annually?

 

[Reep]

You claim that God instituted a government which slaughters 1,000,000+ babies annually?

I vote we throw that baby out with the bathwater. If you’re wondering, what happens then? The question practically answers itself.

If we got rid of the government, what would take its place? Considering the record of governments in the 20th century, murdering almost 200 million of their own citizens (not counting those killed in wars),*** does it really matter?***

 

[sent_by_God]

Reep:

I vote we throw that baby out with the bathwater. If you’re wondering, what happens then? The question practically answers itself.

What baby are you talking about?

Reep:

If we got rid of the government, what would take its place? Considering the record of governments in the 20th century, murdering almost 200 million of their own citizens (not counting those killed in wars), does it really matter?

Where did you get that statistic? I disbelieve it. But even if it were true, note that you said “governments” do that. Thus, this reasoning would mean that anarchy is preferable.

 

[Reep]

Originally Posted by Reep
“I vote we throw that baby out with the bathwater. If you’re wondering, what happens then? The question practically answers itself.”

What baby are you talking about?

Since we are discussing anarchism, the answer must be . . .** the government!**

Originally Posted by Reep
“If we got rid of the government, what would take its place? Considering the record of governments in the 20th century, murdering almost 200 million of their own citizens (not counting those killed in wars), does it really matter?”

Where did you get that statistic? I disbelieve it. But even if it were true, note that you said “governments” do that. Thus, this reasoning would mean that anarchy is preferable.

R.J. Rummel, Death by Government (1997) Rummel is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii.

Indeed, my position is that anarchy–properly understood–would be far and away preferable to the status quo:** violent geographically-based state monopolies** on the initiation of force.

All I ask is that when we conjure up the boogiemen of a non-aggressive society, we **compare them with the massive evils committed by modern government **in the last 100 years.

My point about the unprecedented evil of government aggression is fleshed out more here: What would we do without the state?

 

[JimG]

What baby are you talking about?

Where did you get that statistic? I disbelieve it. But even if it were true, note that you said “governments” do that. Thus, this reasoning would mean that anarchy is preferable.

Start with a perusal of The Black Book of Communism.

The question is, would anarchy have been better than Communist rule? It’s a question with no answer, because in many cases, communist tyranny arose from and because of a condition of anarchy.

 

[sent_by_God]

JimG:

The question is, would anarchy have been better than Communist rule? It’s a question with no answer, because in many cases, communist tyranny arose from and because of a condition of anarchy.

How is that an answerless question just because one sometimes leads to another?

 

[JimG]

How is that an answerless question just because one sometimes leads to another?

I guess you’re right. The answer has been provided by experience. Social anarchy leads to tyranny.

 

[sent_by_God]

I guess you’re right. The answer has been provided by experience. Social anarchy leads to tyranny.

Have you ever seen it happen?

The problem here is that neither of us have ever experienced an anarchy. We’re just trying to guess how it would go. We can’t really say for certain until we’ve tried it.

 

[St_Francis]

Have you ever seen it happen?

The problem here is that neither of us have ever experienced an anarchy. We’re just trying to guess how it would go. We can’t really say for certain until we’ve tried it.

I’ve never tried running my car on milk, either.

 

[sent_by_God]

I’ve never tried running my car on milk, either.

How do you know milk doesn’t have some anomalous chemical properties that make it work like fuel?

 

[CrossofChrist]

You claim that God instituted a government which slaughters 1,000,000+ babies annually?

I bet St. Paul got some strange reactions from claiming a state that burns Christians liberally was instituted by God.

 

[CrossofChrist]

If we got rid of the government, what would take its place? Considering the record of governments in the 20th century, murdering almost 200 million of their own citizens (not counting those killed in wars),*** does it really matter?***

What happens when people commit crimes, if there is no state to administer punishment? Don’t the strong overpower the weak and take control? And then we’re left with totalitarianism.

 

[sent_by_God]

CrossOfChrist:

I bet St. Paul got some strange reactions from claiming a state that burns Christians liberally was instituted by God.

I bet he did (if he even existed), and I bet he too was stumped at the blaring contradiction.

CrossOfChrist:

What happens when people commit crimes, if there is no state to administer punishment? Don’t the strong overpower the weak and take control? And then we’re left with totalitarianism.

If the main deterrent from crime is fear of punishment, then we aren’t really solving the problem. If the thread of punishment was necessary to keep crime levels low, then the society in question would be so full of vice that the government would quickly be corrupted and become far more totalitarian than an anarchy (which is actually quite the opposite of totalitarianism).