Catholic and libertarian? Pope’s top adviser says they’re incompatible

[adawgj]

This is news to me. Though I’m a moderate I agree with many libertarian views. I don’t find libertarianism to be incompatible with Catholicism. They are very complementary.

I suggest reading Dr. Thomas E. Woods books. He is both Catholic and libertarian.

 

[ProVobis]

This is news to me. Though I’m a moderate I agree with many libertarian views. I don’t find libertarianism to be incompatible with Catholicism. They are very complementary.

I suggest reading Dr. Thomas E. Woods books. He is both Catholic and libertarian.

Indeed. I found one of his books “How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization” to be awesome.

 

[TCEL]

This is news to me. Though I’m a moderate I agree with many libertarian views. I don’t find libertarianism to be incompatible with Catholicism. They are very complementary.

I suggest reading Dr. Thomas E. Woods books. He is both Catholic and libertarian.

My question then becomes, “How do we reconcile the social-issues divide within Libertarianism?” It seems too easy to support pro-choice laws with Libertarianism. Or gay-marriage. Etc. “Live and let live.” I guess I don’t see how the same old issues won’t crop up.

 

[adawgj]

My question then becomes, “How do we reconcile the social-issues divide within Libertarianism?” It seems too easy to support pro-choice laws with Libertarianism. Or gay-marriage. Etc. “Live and let live.” I guess I don’t see how the same old issues won’t crop up.

Not sure I’m a moderate not a libertarian. I guess it would be what your conscience tells you about the social issues.

 

[Michael_C]

Once again a representative from the Church makes a proclamation about economics and doesn’t have the courage or maybe the knowledge to mention central banks and how they enrich only the rich, hurt the poor and promote wars.

Libertarianism is simple. It is a belief concerning violence in our society. No one has the right to initiate force against another person. it also condemns someone as a government representative initiating force on behalf of someone else.

These are simple moral rules. No stealing, no hurting anyone. Force is only acceptable in self defense.

 

[lutheran_farmer]

I’m going to go out on a limb on this highly emotional topic.

I think in order to understand where Pope Francis is coming from, you need to look worldwide. He isn’t the American Pope, after all, he’s the Catholic leader for the world. I see people getting their feathers ruffled over and over again over the Pope’s statements and I think they are thinking too much about their own country and forgetting that we are not the center of Catholicism.

Libertarians believe in a* laissez faire* economy. This, I believe is the sticking point for the Holy Father. His interests are to protect the poor. LF economies mean doing away with government regulation of business. Now, while you cheer this on, from the stand point of a US small business bogged down by silly government regulations that make it hard on the ‘little guys’, reflect a moment on what that REALLY means for the majority of the world. Think about workers in countries other than the US. Think about no safety, housing, or wage protections in sweat shops. Think of the devastating fire that killed garment workers last year. Think of weak child labor laws that fail children in India. Think of even worse conditions than sweatshops, which is exactly what would occur if the number of regulations in developing countries were done away with. This is a reality in many of the Catholic strong countries the Pope is in charge of. He doesn’t want to turn back the clock to the Industrial Revolution days in the US. He doesn’t want people working long hours every day with very little pay and suffering immensely. We look at terms, like libertarian, and forget what they mean to a world economy. The fact is, this isn’t all about us. Libertarian governments and laissez-faire economics would cause immense suffering in many developing countries where workers are barely making it already.

economics.about.com/od/governmenttheeconomy/a/laissez_faire.htm

 

[Michael_C]

I’m going to go out on a limb on this highly emotional topic.

I think in order to understand where Pope Francis is coming from, you need to look worldwide. He isn’t the American Pope, after all, he’s the Catholic leader for the world. I see people getting their feathers ruffled over and over again over the Pope’s statements and I think they are thinking too much about their own country and forgetting that we are not the center of Catholicism.

Libertarians believe in a* laissez faire* economy. This, I believe is the sticking point for the Holy Father. His interests are to protect the poor. LF economies mean doing away with government regulation of business. Now, while you cheer this on, from the stand point of a US small business bogged down by silly government regulations that make it hard on the ‘little guys’, reflect a moment on what that REALLY means for the majority of the world. Think about workers in countries other than the US. Think about no safety, housing, or wage protections in sweat shops. Think of the devastating fire that killed garment workers last year. Think of weak child labor laws that fail children in India. Think of even worse conditions than sweatshops, which is exactly what would occur if the number of regulations in developing countries were done away with. This is a reality in many of the Catholic strong countries the Pope is in charge of. He doesn’t want to turn back the clock to the Industrial Revolution days in the US. He doesn’t want people working long hours every day with very little pay and suffering immensely. We look at terms, like libertarian, and forget what they mean to a world economy. The fact is, this isn’t all about us. Libertarian governments and laissez-faire economics would cause immense suffering in many developing countries where workers are barely making it already.

economics.about.com/od/governmenttheeconomy/a/laissez_faire.htm

Hello Lutheran Farmer,

I can appreciate your sentiment but these things need to be thought through. let’s not forget what happened to the children in Bangladesh when under pressure form the U.S. child labor laws were passed. Many of the children had to resort to prostitution to earn money.

cato.org/publications/commentary/child-labor-or-child-prostitution

 

[lutheran_farmer]

The sad fate of some factory workers means that more is broken than just a lack of protection from greedy factory owners. I see no reason, using your logic, why this would justify LF economics or lack of protections for the poorest in society. Are you trying to say that the poorest of the poor are meant to suffer so why help them? No, I really doubt that’s what you mean. Please rethink your argument.

 

[Michael_C]

The best protection is opportunities. State run capitalism or socialism cures nothing. Competition always improves peoples standards of living.

 

[sallybutler]

Basically, no ‘-ism’ is fully compatible with Catholic teachings. Some get a better grade than others when they are still theoretical. Once flawed people start practicing them, they become less and less compatible.

 

[lutheran_farmer]

The best protection is opportunities. State run capitalism or socialism cures nothing. Competition always improves peoples standards of living.

Agreed. But how? I think the Pope has a point regarding the negative effects libertarian economic policies would have on the poorest people in many countries. Christian morality is no longer a widespread tradition (or never was in countries like Pakistan and India). Even when it was (many more church goers in the US during the Industrial Revolution) people didn’t always follow them.

 

[Michael_C]

Agreed. But how? I think the Pope has a point regarding the negative effects libertarian economic policies would have on the poorest people in many countries. Christian morality is no longer a widespread tradition (or never was in countries like Pakistan and India). Even when it was (many more church goers in the US during the Industrial Revolution) people didn’t always follow them.

Respectfully my Lutheran friend, where is there a libertarian society. Why not question the Central banking that is tearing our world apart? Why is this omitted in every economic statement?

 

[lutheran_farmer]

Shall we do away with the Department of Labor and the Child Labor Laws they passed in the early part of the 20th century? Do you see why this is an issue about protecting the poor? The commies weren’t any better (think of the Solidarity movement in Poland which brought down communism). Look at the factory conditions in the Soviet Union. Yeah, communism won’t get us there.

The opportunities should be available, but not at the expense of the education, health and lives of the poorest people. That is the point the Pope has been trying to make in many ways. I think St. Pope John Paul II would agree with that. Look back on what he said to the Polish people which inspired them to rise up against the USSR.

 

[Michael_C]

Shall we do away with the Department of Labor and the Child Labor Laws they passed in the early part of the 20th century? Do you see why this is an issue about protecting the poor? The commies weren’t any better (think of the Solidarity movement in Poland which brought down communism). Look at the factory conditions in the Soviet Union. Yeah, communism won’t get us there.

The opportunities should be available, but not at the expense of the education, health and lives of the poorest people. That is the point the Pope has been trying to make in many ways. I think St. Pope John Paul II would agree with that. Look back on what he said to the Polish people which inspired them to rise up against the USSR.

So you reject the non-agression principle and advocate using coersion to enforce those things? I’m not trying to put words in your mouth. Libertarianism is a belief in non-agression.

 

[lutheran_farmer]

My point was that under a communist regime, there was resistance. Are you familiar with the Solidarity movement? It was non-aggressive.

Are child labor laws considered aggressive?

Where are you coming up with aggression?

 

[minkymurph]

I see difficulties in terms of compatibility between libertarianism and Catholicism.

The most significant issue I see is libertarianism rejects a concept of the common good. To my knowledge Catholicism does not. It advocates a common good.

Secondary to this:

The libertarian model does not adequately address social justice nor disparity of power.

Libertarianism focuses on the individual to a greater extent than the community. Catholicism focuses on community - unless I’ve got some aspect of Catholicism wrong.

Libertarianism endorses charity as does the Church. The difference is the Church does not endorse it to the same extent, in that the rationale of charity is to help people to help themselves. To give them the support they need in order for them to stand on their own two feet - not to be dependent on charity long term. No one should have to live on hand outs long term. Charity is a short term relief measure. Lbertarianism would appear to see it as a long term measure.

Libertarianism is compatible with Catholicism in the protection of property rights, but much more radical. All in all I see a problem.

 

[ProVobis]

Catholicism focuses on community - unless I’ve got some aspect of Catholicism wrong.

To some extent, yes, there is a community. After all it takes a village to educate one child.

But ultimately God judges us one by one.

 

[Seraphim73]

Shall we do away with the Department of Labor and the Child Labor Laws they passed in the early part of the 20th century? Do you see why this is an issue about protecting the poor? The commies weren’t any better (think of the Solidarity movement in Poland which brought down communism). Look at the factory conditions in the Soviet Union. Yeah, communism won’t get us there.

The opportunities should be available, but not at the expense of the education, health and lives of the poorest people. That is the point the Pope has been trying to make in many ways. I think St. Pope John Paul II would agree with that. Look back on what he said to the Polish people which inspired them to rise up against the USSR.

Absolutely we should eliminate the department of labor. Child labor laws have nothing to do with the economy. It’s the government protecting those who do not have the mental faculties to protect themselves. Those laws could be passed at the state level. There is no need for an intrusive, bulky and wasteful federal bureaucracy to do it. We don’t have a department of sexual affairs (yet) but yet we have statutory rape laws that protect minors on the same principle child labor laws do.

Protecting the poor is a good and noble goal but I think in this case you have the cause and effect completely reversed. It’s not the government that protects the poor. Government is made up of people, just like a business or any other organization. And people as a whole can never be trusted to protect the self interest of anyone other than themselves. Do you think the politicians who implement all of these expensive programs really are doing it out of selfless care for the poor? I don’t know, I imagine many of them do, but the reality is they are serving their own self interest by giving free stuff away to help their own reelection. And the bureaucrats protect their self interest by growing these programs to maintain their positions irregardless of whether or not the poor are actually helped.

My point in saying all of this is you saying that free market capitalism is good here in America but not in poorer places is not correct. That is denying the poor in those places the very means for pulling themselves out of poverty. The ultimate and most effective protection for any worker is the existence of other employers, and vice versa. If I am treated poorly I can simply take my product (my labor) down the street to someone who will treat me better. Basic laws of supply and demand dictate that in order to keep good employees the employers will have to treat them well and pay them a fair market wage. You pursue your self interest, the employer pursues theirs and both of you come out the better for the transaction.

 

[lutheran_farmer]

Respectfully my Lutheran friend, where is there a libertarian society. Why not question the Central banking that is tearing our world apart? Why is this omitted in every economic statement?

Hehehe! I’m not Lutheran anymore. I’m one of you guys now.

Thanks for the back and forth. Our system is broken and socialism or communism would fail even more than our system. I wish I had the perfect answer. Perhaps a system that integrates the idea of allowing a free market while still protecting the poorest and most vulnerable. It wouldn’t be libertarian but it wouldn’t be the world bank in control.

 

[minkymurph]

To some extent, yes, there is a community. After all it takes a village to educate one child.

There is a community to an extent, but within the libertarian model the community is an incohesive collection of individuals. In heaven we will not be a collection of separate individuals with a different agenda and alternative conceptions of the common good. As Catholics we should strive not to be that on earth which requires addressing the issue of social justice and disparity of power. A weakness of libertarianism is it sidesteps these issues and does not deal with them adequately.

But ultimately God judges us one by one.

True, but judgement in terms of our eternal destiny is intrinsically linked with how we treat others and as said, we are not merely a collection of individuals in heaven.