Bernie: Pope Francis Is a Socialist

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

I caught it right up front. Bernie is giving high praise.

Have you seen the meme making the rounds?

‘Jesus was a Jewish Socialist.’

Folks spend pages and pages in a very recent topic asserting Bernie was in no way, shape, or form a socialist. Both Bernie supporters and Bernie foes made that claim, despite Beenie himself claiming to be one at various times.

So which is it today - is Bernie a socialist, or isn’t he?

Jesus wasn’t a Jewish socialist in any case, unless the people cheering on the meme ignore the parts of the New Testament and the history of most Christian religions they deplore.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Folks spend pages and pages in a very recent topic asserting Bernie was in no way, shape, or form a socialist. Both Bernie supporters and Bernie foes made that claim, despite Beenie himself claiming to be one at various times.

So which is it today - is Bernie a socialist, or isn’t he?

Jesus wasn’t a Jewish socialist in any case, unless the people cheering on the meme ignore the parts of the New Testament and the history of most Christian religions they deplore.

I think the relevant question is not whether he is or is not a socialist. The relevant question is, does he support any economic policies that would be condemned by the Church? After all, by their fruits you will know them. In the economic realm, there are policies which one can debate whether or not they are prudent, but none that would be categorically condemned by the Church.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

I think the relevant question is not whether he is or is not a socialist. The relevant question is, does he support any economic policies that would be condemned by the Church? After all, by their fruits you will know them. In the economic realm, there are policies which one can debate whether or not they are prudent, but none that would be categorically condemned by the Church.

That I agree with. Trump is a capitalist (to dumb this down). That has little to do with whether or not his use of water boarding is or isn’t in line with Church teaching.

Even setting aside the more black and white social issues often discussed, I have a list of reasons why I think Bernie is a horrific candidate, and not a guy I’d be proud to be, so that is enough for me.

 

[Son_of_Niall]

Agree Poster 2. This is RIDICULOUS.

The Bernt man Sanders is trying to piggy pack off of the media frenzy about the Pope and Trump for his own campaign glory. Simple.

Who HONESTLY trusts the media about the Pope anymore???

OP your religion says “Converting to Judaism”. From what, I am curious? Catholicism or something else?
At any rate, I wonder what your intention posting this provocative thread was?

The one link is from the Washington Post. It is a news story.
Attacking the religion of the OP for simply linking a news story is pretty low.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Per Matthew Archbold, Richard Epstein said in 2011 regarding comments by Pope Benedict XVI, “Standing alone, these words mirror the refrains of countless Spanish socialists, whose relations with the Pope have soured in recent years.” - and Andrew Stuttaford at National Review agreed with Richard Epstein’s comments!

Have those that claim Pope Francis is a Socialist, have they looked at the broad swathe of statements that Pope Francis has made? Because if they have, how could they conclude he is a Socialist?

Prior to becoming Pope:

Back in 2001 (the year Argentina’s economy more-or-less collapsed), Bergoglio wrote in a small publication entitled Hambre y sed de justicia, that: “There are Argentines facing poverty and exclusion, and who we must treat as subjects and actors of their own destiny, and not as patronized recipients of welfare doled out by the State or civil society.”

acton.org/pub/commentary/2013/06/19/pope-francis-true-meaning-poverty

Or from ‘Evangelii Gaudium’:

“The private ownership of goods is justified by the need to protect and increase them, so that they can better serve the common good. …” Again: “Business is … a noble vocation, provided that those engaged in it see themselves challenged by a greater meaning in life; this will enable them truly to serve the common good by striving to increase the goods of this world and to make them more accessible to all.”

catholicexchange.com/pope-francis-economy

I recommend reading the above article, which discusses Pope Francis and socialism. Check out the paragraph on Catholicism having a third way between socialism and capitalism.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Per Matthew Archbold, Richard Epstein said in 2011 regarding comments by Pope Benedict XVI, “Standing alone, these words mirror the refrains of countless Spanish socialists, whose relations with the Pope have soured in recent years.” - and Andrew Stuttaford at National Review agreed with Richard Epstein’s comments!

Have those that claim Pope Francis is a Socialist, have they looked at the broad swathe of statements that Pope Francis has made? Because if they have, how could they conclude he is a Socialist?

Prior to becoming Pope:

acton.org/pub/commentary/2013/06/19/pope-francis-true-meaning-poverty

Or from Evangelii Gaudium’:

catholicexchange.com/pope-francis-economy

I recommend reading the above article, which discusses Pope Francis and socialism. Check out the paragraph on Catholicism having a third way between socialism and capitalism.

Yes, Pope Francis is not a Socialist. But then, neither is Bernie Sanders, despite his own proclamation to the contrary. So when Bernie says “the Pope is a Socialist, like me” he is only saying the Pope shares his views on those matters that Bernie labels as Socialism. So to disprove this statement it is not enough to find some aspect of Socialism that is not agreed to by the Pope, but rather to find some aspect of Bernie’s socio-economic doctrine that is not agreed to by the Pope.

 

[TaurusRex]

The one link is from the Washington Post. It is a news story.
Attacking the religion of the OP for simply linking a news story is pretty low.

To a degree I agree except that in L&C (language and communication) we were basically taught to consider the source;
So I certainly do clandestinely read profiles.

 

[ucfengr]

The Pope is doing something right when the world attacks him so often.

You mean like when Pope Francis refused to meet with Cuban dissidents in Cuba while giving Raul Castro a front row seat at Mass? There are certainly times when Pope Francis creates the impression that he is much more tolerant of the oppressors of Catholics than of oppressed Catholics.

miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article35928477.html

 

[abucs]

I think it was a brilliant political move by Bernie Sanders.

Has he nominated a vice president yet?

 

[ucfengr]

Argentina is a socialist democratic nation I think, not sure.

Actually, “Peronism” more closely resembles “national socialism” than the “democratic socialism” of Hugo Chavez (Chavismo). I don’t think either ideology is compatible with Christianity so it does trouble me that Pope Francis appears fairly sanguine about them.

 

[zz912]

“So few should not have so much, and I think that’s what the pope is talking about.”

In all honesty, who gets to decide who has too much?

I can promise you that Bernie Sanders has more and lives better than at least the bottom one-half of the world. Who is he to decide who has “so much?”

Bernie Sanders has more and lives better than 99% of the world. He LITERALLY is the 1% that he rails against.

 

[zz912]

I think the relevant question is not whether he is or is not a socialist. The relevant question is, does he support any economic policies that would be condemned by the Church? After all, by their fruits you will know them. In the economic realm, there are policies which one can debate whether or not they are prudent, but none that would be categorically condemned by the Church.

The Church teaches subsidiarity, and most if not all of Bernie’s economic views violate this teaching. Each of the 50 states is a sovereign and separate entity, that is the maximum level of govt any of his economic proposals should ever be considered at.

And to head off your predictable response, YES, I know that Medicare and Social Security violate this principle. I agree.

 

[zz912]

Yeah, but Sanders is still more or less correct. The Pope is very critical of capitalism, as befits any Christian. Jesus Christ may well have been opposed to the very concept of money itself, so it’s a given that at the very least He would be opposed to the obscene excesses, inequalities and predatory nature of modern Western economics. If Sanders wasn’t Pro Choice he’d be the best candidate. Which, considering the current crop, is plain as day. As I see it, anyway.

Capitalism is not contrary to the Christian faith. At all.

What many claim is capitalism is actually corporatism or oligarchy with touches of socialism.

And why is it that the actual RESULTS of these policies are never examined? Central and South America are suffering under the results of these policies, so why should we implement them here?

 

[zz912]

That I agree with. Trump is a capitalist (to dumb this down).

No, he is not. He’s at best a corporatist (crony capitalist), and at worst a mild socialist. He LOVES using the power of govt to influence the free market for his benefit.

He also loves threatening trade wars and tariffs.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

The Church teaches subsidiarity, and most if not all of Bernie’s economic views violate this teaching. Each of the 50 states is a sovereign and separate entity, that is the maximum level of govt any of his economic proposals should ever be considered at.

And to head off your predictable response, YES, I know that Medicare and Social Security violate this principle. I agree.

The principle of subsidiarity is a general principle. It’s application is up to the prudential judgement of the faithful. You may think Medicare violates subsidiarity, but that is just your personal prudential judgement. That view may even be shared by many others. It is still prudential judgement. To convince others of your view, you cannot just say “subsidiarity”. You have to put forth a convincing argument that the objective of Social Security or Medicare can always be met at a lower level of government. Consider that large states like California and Texas are larger than many European countries. They could be countries in their own right if they were not part of the US. Then Medicare and Social Security handled at the state level would again be national policy for the nation of Texas or the nation of California. What would subsidiarity say about that? Would they be obliged to push these programs further down to county or city government? To apply subsidiarity you have to show why a particular lower level of government is better suited to handle the objective of these programs.

And even if you could convince others of that, you still would not be done. Because I suspect that your objection to Bernie’s economic views are not simply based on which level of government provides Medicare and Social Security, but rather on the fact that they are provided at all.

 

[stinkcat_14]

The Church teaches subsidiarity, and most if not all of Bernie’s economic views violate this teaching.

This is of course, your opinion. The appropriate level of government to handle a particular issue is left to our prudential judgement.

Each of the 50 states is a sovereign and separate entity, that is the maximum level of govt any of his economic proposals should ever be considered at.

Once again, your opinion and your opinion only.

And to head off your predictable response, YES, I know that Medicare and Social Security violate this principle. I agree.

This we agree on.

 

[zz912]

This is of course, your opinion. The appropriate level of government to handle a particular issue is left to our prudential judgement.

Once again, your opinion and your opinion only.

This we agree on.

Your last sentence negates the ones prior. Funny how you have no problem stating Medicare and SSI violate subsidiarity, but you can then claim that my application of the same principle to Bernie’s other economic policies somehow is only my opinion.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too. Are you stating that Medicare and SSI violating subsidiarity is only your opinion? Or are you admitting that Bernie’s policies violate subsidiarity just like SSI and Medicare do? You have to choose one. You can NOT apply subsidiarity to SSI and Medicare and NOT apply it to Bernie.

Your penchant for playing devil’s advocate has left you in a mutually contradictory position.

 

[Cider]

I think that Bernie has a correct assessment. He and the pope share the same economic worldview.

I’d say that if one isn’t a socialist then stop giving them fodder to call you one.

 

[Darryl1958]

There are also some economic worldviews that Bernie and the Koch brothers share, like the problem of corporate welfare.

As do I. I am against that crony capitalism too.
I would say overall that mine is closer to the Koch’s economic worldview, and the pope’s world view is closer to the economic world view of the self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders than it is to mine of the Kochs Bros.

 

[zz912]

The principle of subsidiarity is a general principle. It’s application is up to the prudential judgement of the faithful. You may think Medicare violates subsidiarity, but that is just your personal prudential judgement. That view may even be shared by many others. It is still prudential judgement. To convince others of your view, you cannot just say “subsidiarity”. You have to put forth a convincing argument that the objective of Social Security or Medicare can always be met at a lower level of government. Consider that large states like California and Texas are larger than many European countries. They could be countries in their own right if they were not part of the US. Then Medicare and Social Security handled at the state level would again be national policy for the nation of Texas or the nation of California. What would subsidiarity say about that? Would they be obliged to push these programs further down to county or city government? To apply subsidiarity you have to show why a particular lower level of government is better suited to handle the objective of these programs.

Retirement plans and health insurance plans are currently being run at the county and state level. So in fidelity to subsidiarity, there is no justification for taking that authority away from a lower level and giving it to a higher level of government. It violates the Catholic teaching.

You certainly could argue they could be run at a lower level than state level, but there is no justification for moving it to a higher level and remain consistent with Church teaching. In fact, Galveston County in Texas opted out of Social Security in the early 80’s (this opt-out was swiftly closed by Congress). Since they have been running it, the Galveston County retirees receive MUCH higher benefits than SSI, and their retirement fund has actual assets in it, unlike the worthless IOU’s in the SSI fund. So the criminal and/or incompetent way that SSI is run proves that the lower level of government actually works better.

And even if you could convince others of that, you still would not be done. Because I suspect that your objection to Bernie’s economic views are not simply based on which level of government provides Medicare and Social Security, but rather on the fact that they are provided at all.

I wouldn’t be opposed in principle to states running programs similar to SSI, but actually run as retirement funds and not as cookie jars that politicians can raid. I think lower levels of government are held much more to account and are much better for trying out these things to see if they actually work.

That is my major opposition to socialism, besides it being born out of evil that is condemned by the Church. It doesn’t work. It never delivers the promises it makes. I’m a very practical guy, and if a government program can be shown to work, then I’m not that up in arms about it. That’s why virtually ALL programs need to be at the local or state level.