Can Socialism, The Church and Democracy co-exist?

[vern_humphrey]

wcknight:

The Russians prior to Stalin’s take over wanted religious freedom. Stalin murdered all those who took this view. Would a socialist state with freedom of religion and other basic freedoms work ?

The evil that my son and these neo-socialists see is the exploitation of workers by big business and corporate America.

In the former Soviet Union, there was a common joke. "Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is just the opposite."http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

wcknight:

It is hard to argue that capitalism is okay, when workers in huge corportations are paid hundreds of times less than the corporate executives and the owners, rich share holders. This country is ruled by the super rich, even though we have elections, it takes wealth to get elected.

I emphasized your last comment because it shows the folly of your position. You want socialism, you get dictatorships. And dictatorships are far worse than what we have now.

wcknight:

And even if a poor person were to rise to some position of authority, they are very unlikely to have much of an impact. Is it any wonder that the recent tax cuts favored the rich ? Less than 1% of the population controls over 50% of the wealth.

You seem to think that “poor person” is a race or separate species. More than 80% of millionaires living today made it up from the ranks of the “poor.”

People like Ronald Reagan and Billy Clinton were not born rich.

 

[wcknight]

vern humphrey:

In the former Soviet Union, there was a common joke. "Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is just the opposite."http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

I emphasized your last comment because it shows the folly of your position. You want socialism, you get dictatorships. And dictatorships are far worse than what we have now.

You seem to think that “poor person” is a race or separate species. More than 80% of millionaires living today made it up from the ranks of the “poor.”

People like Ronald Reagan and Billy Clinton were not born rich.

Actually I do not advocate socialism at all, my son does.

I am a born and true believer in capitalism, with one caveat. How do we justify the huge discrepancy between the super wealthy and the average worker ?

I think being able to rise up from one class to another is one of capitalism best features, it gives everyone the chance to better themselves.

My sons argument is why should a Henry Ford or Bill Gates get hundreds of millions or Billions just because they happened to have the right idea at the right time. And why should their sons and distant relatives continue to benifit form a one time event.

wc

 

[sarcophagus]

In my opinion, Democracy and Church do not get along…at all. Because democracy takes into account the rights, opinions, and truths of all people, no religion can dominate. It’s belief (and lack thereof) are viewed as equal and so their value is parred down. Look at the state that religion is in right now. Secularism rules with an iron fist when democracy is in place. Soon, no person will be able to practice any religion without 10 people claiming to be offended (already occuring with christianity). Secularism is today’s religion. Add socialism to the mix and we have a very big mess on our hands.

 

[wcknight]

vern humphrey:

In the former Soviet Union, there was a common joke. "Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is just the opposite."http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

I emphasized your last comment because it shows the folly of your position. You want socialism, you get dictatorships. And dictatorships are far worse than what we have now.

You seem to think that “poor person” is a race or separate species. More than 80% of millionaires living today made it up from the ranks of the “poor.”

People like Ronald Reagan and Billy Clinton were not born rich.

Historically socialism has been followed closely by a dictatorship which totally destroys any semeblance of basic human rights. I totally concur that dictatorships are inherently evil.

BUT can socialism work within a democracy and can it work while preserving basic human freedoms such as freedom of religion, freedom of press and freedom to choose whatever line of work or living an individual chooses. ?

Every ethnic group has had to work themselves out of pretty miserable living conditions. I don’t have a problem with starting from scratch and working into a comfortable life style.

However, our system seems to thrive on the exploitation of new immigrants. Our industries use up cheap labor with low overhead. And even for the average worker, it is questionable except for a few enterprises, if we get a fair wage or fair stake in the profits that American workers help generate.

I do not have a problem with folks working their way up through the system. And personally I do not see a problem with folks leaving something to secure their kids finances at least for the near term.

BUT if the trend continues indefinitely, what we will have evolve into, would be a relatively small group of folks who control most of the wealth in the country and another huge group who must do all the real work and production. In effect we will be a country of indentured servants. We may be in that situation already, but no one has noticed it yet.

wc

 

[vern_humphrey]

wcknight:

Actually I do not advocate socialism at all, my son does.

My mistake then. I offer you my apology.

wcknight:

I am a born and true believer in capitalism, with one caveat. How do we justify the huge discrepancy between the super wealthy and the average worker ?

How do we justify the huge discrepancy between the value of an acre of land in the desert in Utah and an acre in Manhatten?

A thing is worth what a willing buyer will offer and a willing seller will accept.

We live in a society where a person who can throw a baseball through the center of a tire 66 feet away is offered more than a man with a PhD in biochemistry. Where a girl who wears her underwear on the outside, and sings is offered more than a master electrician.

By and large, if you look at the enormous problems of organizing, managing and expanding a large business, you see that the skills needed are rare indeed – and stockholders are willing to pay a premium. At the same time, if you look at people who work as waitresses or busboys, you often find people who have no education, no special skills, and are doing nothing to remedy the situation

wcknight:

I think being able to rise up from one class to another is one of capitalism best features, it gives everyone the chance to better themselves.

Yes, it does. We fail when we try too much social tinkering with the system. For example, if you look at the issue of “Affirmative Action” you see women and minorities with skills and education do well – but by and large, they are people who would do well, regardless. What you do NOT see is people who cannot read or write getting jobs as Secretary of State or Neurosurgeon.

We cannot force the system to act as we wish – but we CAN work with the system to achieve the same effect. We COULD commit ourselves to giving every child in America a first-class education – but we won’t.

wcknight:

My sons argument is why should a Henry Ford or Bill Gates get hundreds of millions or Billions just because they happened to have the right idea at the right time. And why should their sons and distant relatives continue to benifit form a one time event.

wc

Your son is advancing two different arguments as if they were one:

1. His first argument fundamentally opposes meritocracy, the concept that people should be allowed to go as fast and as far as they can. However, he doesn’t address the alternative – what happens if we clamp down, and DON’T allow the Henry Fords and Bill Gates of the world to do their thing?
2. His second argument pre-supposes most “rich” people inhereted what they got. More than 80% of millionaries are self-made men. When we seek to prevent people from inheriting, we are attacking a non-existant problem AND strangling the efforts of those struggling to rise out of the bottom of the heap, who dream of passing on to their children and grandchildren some of what they earned.

 

[Matt16_18]

vern humphrey:

Nowhere can you show that your view of how life should be lived is the command of Christ.

My view of life is that we should live as Christ commanded. Even if we managed to acquire a lot of wealth before we die, if we don’t live our lives as Christ commanded, then we have failed in life. "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”
Matt. 6:24

 

[amarischuk]

ByzCath:

If this is so, then how do you reconcile what Pope John XXIII said in Mater Et Magistra?

Why not, instead of listening to a bunch of right-wing fanatics, actually READ Mater et Magistra:

On Socialism

1. Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_15051961_mater_en.html

Now what ‘socialism’ is he talking about? Is it the blanket concept being attacked here?

Or read Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum: vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html

Historically socialism has been followed closely by a dictatorship which totally destroys any semeblance of basic human rights. I totally concur that dictatorships are inherently evil.

What is your definition of dictatorships? The Church has never taught that dictatorships are inherently evil.

As Chesterton wrote: Americans have confused democracy with voting.

 

[vern_humphrey]

amarischuk:

What is your definition of dictatorships? The Church has never taught that dictatorships are inherently evil.

If you don’t believe that dictatorships are inherently evil, I can arrange for you to go live under one. http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

 

[Ghosty]

I would again like to point out that the Church rejects capitalism in the same way it rejects Socialism. This comes straight from the CCC. To be a “Capitalist” is as antithetical to the Church as being a “Socialist”.

 

[FightingFat]

Scullinius:

Socialism is inherently violent because it does not respect private property rights.

The Labour party has long been the natural choice for English Catholics and it has always been suggested that Catholic voters should support Labour.
Social justice and equality is a central theme of our faith.

 

[Matt16_18]

Ghosty:

I would again like to point out that the Church rejects capitalism in the same way it rejects Socialism. This comes straight from the CCC. To be a “Capitalist” is as antithetical to the Church as being a “Socialist”.

The church rejects *godless * captialism and *godless * socialism.

A monarchial dictatorship that is consecrated to God, that is run by the monarchs for the glory of God, is better than the government of a godless democracy.

Democracy can also be used as a tool of Satan. When people vote themselves the right to murder the innocent, how is that political system pleasing to God?

 

[Matt16_18]

As a nation, we only have strength when we walk in God’s ways.I am the LORD your God, who brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, that you should not be their slaves; and I have broken the bars of your yoke and made you walk erect. "But if you will not hearken to me, and will not do all these commandments, if you spurn my statutes, and if your soul abhors my ordinances, so that you will not do all my commandments, but break my covenant, I will do this to you: I will appoint over you sudden terror, consumption, and fever that waste the eyes and cause life to pine away. And you shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it; I will set my face against you, and you shall be smitten before your enemies; those who hate you shall rule over you, and you shall flee when none pursues you. And if in spite of this you will not hearken to me, then I will chastise you again sevenfold for your sins, and I will break the pride of your power, and I will make your heavens like iron and your earth like brass; and your strength shall be spent in vain, for your land shall not yield its increase, and the trees of the land shall not yield their fruit. "Then if you walk contrary to me, and will not hearken to me, I will bring more plagues upon you, sevenfold as many as your sins. And I will let loose the wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children, and destroy your cattle, and make you few in number, so that your ways shall become desolate.
Leviticus 26:13-26

Minister Recounts a Trip to 'Hell’

“People get mad at me for saying it, but God is very unhappy with what we’re doing,” adds Storm, now a Methodist minister. "When I came back from the experience I was almost out of my mind trying to convert people. God wanted a worldwide conversion thousands of years ago. God pulled out all the stops 2,000 years ago with Jesus. From God’s view, that was the definitive moment in human history. And the impact of the prophets and teachers and the Messiah has been a big disappointment to God because people have by and large rejected it. I was told that God wants this conversion. And if we don’t get with the program fairly soon, He is going to have to intervene in some ways that from a human point of view are going to seem cataclysmic. God is really tired of what we’re doing to one another and the planet and to His Creation. We were put in this world to be stewards and live in harmony with His creation and one another and we don’t realize the important spiritual consequences of what we do when we raise a child in a faithless society.

'I asked how [purification] would come about, and they said it would be simple, that our society is very dependent on a lot of very fragile things – energy grid, transportation," Storm told Spirit Daily more than two years ago. "In each geographical area of the United States people used to be relatively self-sufficient as far as agricultural products. Now, how long would any state survive without the transport of food and energy?

“What would happen is these very complex and delicate grids of our economic system would begin to break down. We’ve created a society of such cruel and self-centered people that the very nature of civilization would begin to break down. The angels showed me that what would happen is that people would begin robbing the grocery stores, hoarding goods, and killing one another for gasoline and tires, and as a consequence everything would break down and would end up in chaos.”

Spirit Daily

 

[wcknight]

Matt16_18:

The church rejects *godless *captialism and *godless *socialism.

A monarchial dictatorship that is consecrated to God, that is run by the monarchs for the glory of God, is better than the government of a godless democracy.

Democracy can also be used as a tool of Satan. When people vote themselves the right to murder the innocent, how is that political system pleasing to God?

Good point, esp your last statement.

 

[wcknight]

amarischuk:

What is your definition of dictatorships? The Church has never taught that dictatorships are inherently evil.

As Chesterton wrote: Americans have confused democracy with voting.

‘Inherently evil’ may be a bit rash, but most have not turned out well. I’m a big believer in ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’

I would say a dictator is someone who wields absolute power. Some one who is not answerable to the rule of law or any other group or individual.

Some say a benevolent dictatorship would be the best form of government.

However, the term,'benevolent dictatorship ', is just about an oxymoron. Most dictators turn out to be despots, and extremely horrendous ones at that. I can’t name any who would be considered benevolent, but I dare say that most have become tyrants and in many cases mass murderers.

You would have to go back to Julius Casear to find a noble dicataor, and even he may have become a tryant if he had lived longer.

wc

 

[Ignatius]

NO! Communism, Socialism and Secularism are much too focused on Hatred, Envy and many other worldly vices.

 

[Ghosty]

The church rejects *godless *captialism and *godless *socialism.

Exactly. I would say, based on your phrasing, that it rejects them in the same manner. I was simply using a play on phrasing in the hopes that people would do some deeper investigation into the issue of why the Church “rejects” socialism (which you’ve pointed out it doesn’t in its entirety). I just thought I’d take a different tactic for a change, and wasn’t expecting that you’d jump on it first

Your reply is the one I was looking for. I just never thought you and I were arguing on this point. This brings me to…

NO! Communism, Socialism and Secularism are much too focused on Hatred, Envy and many other worldly vices.

The same can be said of Capitalism. Perhaps you’d do better to narrow your statement a bit, as Mat16_18 has indicated (although Secularism falls within the narrowed definition as well, I would think). If the Church can do it, so can you.

Some say a benevolent dictatorship would be the best form of government.

The only dictator I’d trust would be Christ. When He returns, I’ll support him. Until then, I personally consider myself a free agent amongst many fools like myself trying to rule others without a clue in how to do it.

 

[Ignatius]

Ghosty:

Ignatius:

NO! Communism, Socialism and Secularism are much too focused on Hatred, Envy and many other worldly vices.

Perhaps you’d do better to narrow your statement a bit,

No, capitalism is simply an economic system. The others are inherently evil as evidenced by their fruit.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Ignatius:

No, capitalism is simply an economic system. The others are inherently evil as evidenced by their fruit.

Have you ever heard the Parable of the Chocolate Cake?

A man had a recipe that said “Mix mud and straw and bake in the oven.”

Now, you may say, “That’s not a chocolate cake, that’s a brick!”

But the man pointed out that right there on the recipe card it said, “Chocolate Cake.” Not only that, but he had a wonderful, intricate theory that this is the way to make a chocolate cake.

The only problem is, every time anyone tries the recipe, all they get is a brick!http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon11.gif

The recipe, of course is Communism. You can point out how such systems have ruined economies, enslaved and killed people, and the defenders of such systems will say, “Well, that’s not TRUE communism.”

But I say, when you try the recipe over and over, and get a brick every time, then it IS a recipe for bricks, regardless of what it says on the card, and regardless of any fancy theory.

And Communism produces brutal totalitarian dictatorships every time it’s tried, and therefore Communism IS a recipe for brutal totalitarian dictatorship, no matter what the recipe card says.

And Zbignew Brzinski was right when he said, “Communism is the greatest disaster ever to overtake the Human Race.”

 

[mlchance]

wcknight:

Sharing resources in itself is not evil. Co-operatives operate completely within the laws of our democracy and have no anti-religion associated with it.

Socialism is not about sharing resources. It is about the government controlling those resources and distributing them according to priorities set by the government.

wcknight:

It is the restrictions on basic human freedoms that makes the socialist states of the past so offensive to the Church.

Socialism always violates basic human freedoms, or at least the basic human freedom to allot one’s own resources and property as one sees fit.

wcknight:

BUT prior to WWII, the Nazis in Germany also started off with less than 1% approval of the German voters. As offensive as the hate rhetoric against Jews was, when the country became a financial basket case, the Germans voted the Nazis in. The Nazis managed to tone down its message or the voters ignored the consequences.

There are no significant parallels between the government of the Weimar Republic and the U.S. What happened in Germany to put the National Socialists in power could not happen here without the total destruction of our system of government.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[vern_humphrey]

mlchance:

Socialism always violates basic human freedoms, or at least the basic human freedom to allot one’s own resources and property as one sees fit.

Socialism is a brick, not a chocolate cake.