Catholicism and Communism (Socialism?)

[AdriannaJean]

I think a distinction needs to be made between Communism and Communalism. Communism is forced sharing; communalism is where everyone does it out of their own free will. Monks practice Communalism. People can’t be forced to do something good, or else the goodness in it is lost.

 

[sedonaman]

I think a distinction needs to be made between Communism and Communalism.

That’s a new one on me. I always thought that people who lived in communes were communists.

 

[estesbob]

But you won’t grant the same liberty to communism, am I right?

Because it has ALWAYS caused mass misery whenever it was tried

 

[EnchantedEve]

I could not disagree more that what Jesus taught was socialistic. Socialism is compulsory state control of real property and its use, distributed to everyone at the government’s desire. What did Our Lord say that sounded like that? Sharing and being ethical is just plain being human, and, when not done by government compulsion, is simply Christianity. When a man is compelled to worship, it is not faith. When a man is compelled to give, it is not charity, it is theft.

Can someone give me an example of where the free market is inherently unjust or does not work? And do not conflate the liberal fascist economic system the US has with the free market. Government regulation NEVER works, and anyone who wants to challenge that I say try me. This goes double for communism, socialism and all other “isms.” The system of capitalism condemned by the popes would not exist in the free market due to market changes, and most of the recommendations of Pope Leo XIII can be carried out in a free market with little or no government intervention. Please show me where this is not true.

And, for those who are still hung up on the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the Index should read some real history and not protestant propaganda. Legende Negro is alive and well.

 

[sedonaman]

…

Can someone give me an example of where the free market is inherently unjust or does not work?

Yes, but first I must say that I am a Reagan Republican.

Here is an actual example of what I find unjust about the free market:

A man invents a new tool and contracts with a nationwide department store chain to offer them for sale to the public. The department store chain orders a small quantity the first year, ostensibly to determine if they will be popular. They sell like hotcakes. The second year, the chain orders ten times as many, and the inventor borrows money to expand his factory to meet the chain’s requirement, and he does. The next year after that, the chain cuts way back on its order, forcing the inventor into a financial bind, and the chain buys him out. After that, the chain produces and sells his invention and reaps all the profits.

 

[estesbob]

Yes, but first I must say that I am a Reagan Republican.

Here is an actual example of what I find unjust about the free market:
A man invents a new tool and contracts with a nationwide department store chain to offer them for sale to the public. The department store chain orders a small quantity the first year, ostensibly to determine if they will be popular. They sell like hotcakes. The second year, the chain orders ten times as many, and the inventor borrows money to expand his factory to meet the chain’s requirement, and he does. The next year after that, the chain cuts way back on its order, forcing the inventor into a financial bind, and the chain buys him out. After that, the chain produces and sells his invention and reaps all the profits.

Actually the problem here is not capitalism-its that the tool inventor either did not seek or got bad advice. you dont expand your factory to serve one customer before first obtaining a long term contract for enough tools to pay for your expansion. Of course under socialism or commuism the tool would have not been invented in the first place as there would have been no incentive to do so. What the socialistic/communistic govt would do is after tool to be invented in a capitlaistic country they would steal the design giving the inventor absolutely nothing.

 

[sedonaman]

Actually the problem here is not capitalism – its [sic] that the tool inventor either did not seek or got bad advice. you dont [sic] expand your factory to serve one customer before first obtaining a long term contract for enough tools to pay for your expansion.

I disagree. Capitalism allows for this [at least it did in those days]. Would you consider it just to take advantage of someone’s imprudence? If you had owned the chain, would you do this sort of thing? I think not. The fact that the inventor might not have been prudent, therefore, is irrelevant.

Of course under socialism or commuism the tool would have not been invented in the first place as there would have been no incentive to do so. What the socialistic/communistic govt would do is after tool to be invented in a capitlaistic country they would steal the design giving the inventor absolutely nothing.

As a Reagan Republican, I am not arguing that socialism or communism are better than capitalism.

 

[estesbob]

I disagree. Capitalism allows for this [at least it did in those days]. Would you consider it just to take advantage of someone’s imprudence? If you had owned the chain, would you do this sort of thing? I think not. The fact that the inventor might not have been prudent, therefore, is irrelevant.

Not irelevant at all-capitalism is not the problem here-the unethical behavior of the chain is. People will cheat you no matter what system they live under.

As a Reagan Republican, I am not arguing that socialism or communism are better than capitalism.

 

[sedonaman]

Not irelevant at all - capitalism is not the problem here - the unethical behavior of the chain is.

But capitalism allows for the behavior “let the buyer beware”]. It’s the law that steps in to prevent unethical behavior, but the law is not capitalism.

 

[EnchantedEve]

But capitalism allows for the behavior “let the buyer beware”]. It’s the law that steps in to prevent unethical behavior, but the law is not capitalism.

Well, first of all the idea that a government of currupt, selfish leaders like we have can generate legislation which promotes ethics is itself pretty funny.

Aside from that however, under the current system, if a person has a patent I would be suprised if a chain store could produce the item themeselves without proper licensing, because then they would clearly be set up for a lawsuit. If the man has no patent, then he can be presumed to operate at his own risk. If the government passed laws preventing companies from reproducing similar products then we have the Polaroid dilemma, where, due to their rather narrow patent, they permitted no one else to enter the market. But with no incentive to change and develop their product, they eventually fell behind when the entirely new product, digital photography, came out. Finally, it went bankrupt and disappeared altogether. The market will always ferret out the bad in time.

As someone else pointed out, unjust behaviour by individuals does not make the free market itself unjust. It simply means that there will always be unethical people. Then communism comes and makes the whole system unethical! This I do not feel is a real solution.

This being said, my argument for a free market, unregulated by government, is not an argument for everything that the market produces. Leo XIII correctly condemned market materialism and commercialism, but government regulation will not change this, Faith will. When a culture has right values, the negative aspects of the market economy will decline. Nothing can ever make communism, even virtuous people, a better system.

 

[sedonaman]

… under the current system, if a person has a patent I would be suprised if a chain store could produce the item themeselves without proper licensing, because then they would clearly be set up for a lawsuit.

Here you are again confusing the law with capitalism.

As someone else pointed out, unjust behaviour by individuals does not make the free market itself unjust. It simply means that there will always be unethical people. Then communism comes and makes the whole system unethical! This I do not feel is a real solution.

This being said, my argument for a free market, unregulated by government, is not an argument for everything that the market produces. Leo XIII correctly condemned market materialism and commercialism, but government regulation will not change this, Faith will. When a culture has right values, the negative aspects of the market economy will decline. Nothing can ever make communism, even virtuous people, a better system.

I thought that my statement about being a Reagan Republican would allay thoughts that I consider communism better than capitalism.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Here you are again confusing the law with capitalism.

I thought that my statement about being a Reagan Republican would allay thoughts that I consider communism better than capitalism.

Apologies, the communism statement was not directed at you, sedonaman, but at anyone else who was tempted to justify communism in any form.

That being said, a nation’s economic system is inseperable from its legal foundations. What makes a free market free is it’s lack of regulation and direction from government, and the legal framework added to support that idea. People often act as if the free market means anarchy. Even in a pure free market the government could have the power to enforce contracts and mediate disputes. In my example I was simply trying to point out that even in a free market the example you cite for injustice is probably not likely to occur often, and would render its position as a criticism less potent. This example is not inherant to the system, just a possibile event. You would have to say why lack of government intervention made this injustice necessarily occur.

By way, kudos to your Reaganism.

 

[Nino]

Two encyclicals: Mit Brennener Soge,March 14,1937 condemned national socialism…later nicknamed Nazism…in Germany…this letter from Rome…written by The Future Pope PiusX11 but under the name of Pius!X…was condemned in Gernamy and not allowed in…it had to be smuggled in…all while FDR was snuggling up to the murderers…then came Divini Redemptoris…this condemned Atheistic communism by name and Russia in particular…this also was ingnored by FDR ,I guess he loved to refer to the mass murderer Stalin.as …'good ole Joe!..ya gotta luv the guy!..but these movements are only names…its the same ole same ole…5 people with guns and know how telling the other 95 how,when,where and if>.IF to do this or that. There is no difference between these isms…toss in Fascism which also was a movement of the left…total dictatorship …in the encyclical on communism the holy father discusses how the terrible persecutions in mexico and spain have been met with deadly silence on the part of the worlds media…he knew of the control the left has over us…soon the anniversery of the slaughter in china in that square…what over 6,000 students were executed by our trading partner…and not a w(name removed by moderator)er from the so called capitalists…they are all on the same team…just wear different jersies…oh well…the blind refuse to see and the deaf to hear…enjoy the coming chains…yes chains…not change for the better but chains on our bill of rights…

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I didn’t forget, I just thought what was provided was sufficient.

But you won’t grant the same liberty to communism, am I right?

To something that’s inherently evil? Why should anyone?

 

[AdriannaJean]

That’s a new one on me. I always thought that people who lived in communes were communists.

I thought that too, until it was brought up in a class I took. I might be wrong here, but communists refers to people who think that there should be a governing body that regulates and controls the “sharing” between the people. Communalists just live in a community, share everything they have, possessions and talents, without being forced to. The differing factor is free will.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

And we all know how well communes work. The Pilgrims almost died of it, until someone imported capitalism.

 

[Oreoracle]

To something that’s inherently evil? Why should anyone?

Inherently evil you say? Do tell…

 

[human_being]

Really? I wouldn’t say a system responsible for things such as the Inquisition and the Index of Prohibited Books “worked” unless I was a victim of tunnel vision.

What else has worked this long?

 

[human_being]

Yes, but first I must say that I am a Reagan Republican.

[/INDENT]

What is a Reagan Republican? I’ve seen nothing but alot of good paying working class jobs shipped right out of the USA since Reagan. Reagan was great for the 'educated",I suppose.Not for the uneducated. And most of the country is, and probably will be,uneducated. He was an acor, and fooled the working classes into voting for him so they could be divided and conquered by constantly chasing jobs around the country until those jobs finally leave the country.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Not really. Jesus called for people to voluntarily give to the poor. To voluntarily redistribute wealth.

Socialism uses the coercive power of government to redistribute wealth, which seems a lot like theft to me.

God Bless

How can it be theft when all belongs to God?
Land has already been stolen and resources have long been exploited merely to serve the accumulation of profit in the pursuit of mindless direction-less power, reserved for a minority elite that is happy only to give that which is relatively crumbs to a growing majority of poor people; A nation of poor people whom are compelled under pain of survival to preserve the continuation of a system that is going no-where meaningful or positive in so far as building a better world for all people and future generations. That sounds allot like theft to me.

I agree that we should be able to give charity freely in so far as this pertains to the growth of moral virtue. However this is no excuse for the free reign of evils such as selfishness and greed to every and any degree, and neither does such a virtue pertain to all situations accept to serve as a straw-man, erected to cover up mans iniquities under a false pretense to preserve the moral good. Religion is often hijacked and abused in order to lend the appearance of good to an image that so clearly resembles the beast. But as good as this illusion might be, it does not fool me.

If the accumulation and exploitation of resources is as such that it causes great poverty and sickness to offended nations, then a great crime is being committed against humanity and God.

If this is as such the case, then Moral Law compels us to act.

I believe in a Just-War and a Just-Revolution.