'I'm no Marxist', Pope Francis tells conservative critics

[lynnvinc]

From the dawn of man until relatively recently, including of course, the time that Jesus walked the earth, great wealth was primarily a product of conquest and no society had any semblance of meritocracy or class mobility. Further, until the advent of modern industrial capitalism, all but the ultra rich lived pretty miserable lives.

The question is whether Pope Francis is willing to recognize this reality and focus on the new problems that this has created even as it has alleviated old problems.

To pretend that nothing has changed since the time of Jesus is simply foolish and does a diservice to the history of Christianity.

I completely agree (what I meant is What Would Jesus Think Today, which would probably be similar to the thinking of Pope Francis and BXVI, BTW). It’s really a hard nut to crack. Neither popes suggested that we go to a USSR-type economic system (which Marxists are wont to point out was NOT communism), and they are quite concerned about the poor and suffering of the world – many of whom suffer from the global economy (which is not truly “laissez faire” as you might point out, since the multinationals have more or less bought out political power and their “law” trumps national laws to protect people from harms).

I also agree that King Herod was probably a lot poorer than a typical middle class American, which gives me the idea that it is probably more difficult for a middle class American to get into heaven than an elephant pass through the eye of a needle.

The earliest humans actually (it is hypothesized) practiced generalized reciprocity (AKA “primitive communism,” and not unlike the economic structure of convents and monasteries). However, even Marx realized that type of system was not feasible in a large scale, state-level industrialized society, but the systems that arose in “communist” countries were pretty bad for human rights and also greatly harmed their environments, perhaps more than capitalist societies, but not more than global capitalism today.

I know some people who suggest a 3rd economic system, Catholic inspired “distributism” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism). I don’t know if it would work and be better or not, and I think it would be almost impossible to switch to – unless everyone around the world, including the economic and political powers that be have some great spiritual transformation.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I completely agree (what I meant is What Would Jesus Think Today, which would probably be similar to the thinking of Pope Francis and BXVI, BTW). It’s really a hard nut to crack. Neither popes suggested that we go to a USSR-type economic system (which Marxists are wont to point out was NOT communism), and they are quite concerned about the poor and suffering of the world – many of whom suffer from the global economy (which is not truly “laissez faire” as you might point out, since the multinationals have more or less bought out political power and their “law” trumps national laws to protect people from harms).

I also agree that King Herod was probably a lot poorer than a typical middle class American, which gives me the idea that it is probably more difficult for a middle class American to get into heaven than an elephant pass through the eye of a needle.

The earliest humans actually (it is hypothesized) practiced generalized reciprocity (AKA “primitive communism,” and not unlike the economic structure of convents and monasteries). However, even Marx realized that type of system was not feasible in a large scale, state-level industrialized society, but the systems that arose in “communist” countries were pretty bad for human rights and also greatly harmed their environments, perhaps more than capitalist societies, but not more than global capitalism today.

I know some people who suggest a 3rd economic system, Catholic inspired “distributism” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism). I don’t know if it would work and be better or not, and I think it would be almost impossible to switch to – unless everyone around the world, including the economic and political powers that be have some great spiritual transformation.

What has been interesting about the last couple decades is that most of the increase in consumption has occured in the developing world owing mainly to “globalization”. Primarily this has been China, India, and a few others but this progress has not been equitably diestributed among the poor. There are fewer poor Chinese and Indians but I don’t think there fewer poor Argentinians or Kenyans.

So what we have is a classic half full/empty glass. Does this require a new economic system? Only if you subscribe to the half empty view. It’s not obvious to me that this is a distribution problem.

 

[Silvio_Dante]

I do find it entertaining watching Market driven Catholics try and create their own narrative on what the Pope said in order to justify their defiance of Social justice teachings and of course the pope’s own emphatic rejection of vulture capitalism and open advocacy for the victims of western greed…

 

[Catolico65]

With all due respect I believe there is some confusion. Pope Francis record on this issue has been clear for many years when he was Cardinal. He is neither for Marxism nor unbridled capitalism. I am fluent in Spanish and have seen his commentaries when he was Cardinal.

What many in the west don’t realize is perspective is very important in order to understand the Pope’s position. For example, when the Pope speaks of “trickle down” economics as being an inequitable solution he is basing this on his experience with Latina America countries where there are very little social programs if any at all for the poor, as opposed to the West where they are very vigorous in comparison.

Furthermore, Frances has also consistently opposed the Marxists in Argentina to the point that he has been accused of being a fascist. He opposes Marxism for many reasons, not the least of which is it’s innate opposition to God, it’s use of violence against innocents and of course because it is not self sustainable economically.

What Francis would prefer to see are economic systems where the government doesn’t turn a blind eye to the greed of the super rich and while forgetting the poor. Since it has already been established that Frances firmly opposes Marxism for many reasons the only other solution is a “moral capitalism” with social services. In fact this is very similar to what many countries in Europe and the US have now but he would like to see checks on gross abuses such as what happened in the US and the housing market lending scandal.

In summary, Pope Francis perspective is definitely one of someone from a country with almost no social services who opposes unbridled capitalism while also being ideologically opposed to godless Marxism and it’s failed economic model.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

With all due respect I believe there is some confusion. Pope Francis record on this issue has been clear for many years when he was Cardinal. He is neither for Marxism nor unbridled capitalism. I am fluent in Spanish and have seen his commentaries when he was Cardinal.

What many in the west don’t realize is perspective is very important in order to understand the Pope’s position. For example, when the Pope speaks of “trickle down” economics as being an inequitable solution he is basing this on his experience with Latina America countries where there are very little social programs if any at all for the poor, as opposed to the West where they are very vigorous in comparison.

Furthermore, Frances has also consistently opposed the Marxists in Argentina to the point that he has been accused of being a fascist. He opposes Marxism for many reasons, not the least of which is it’s innate opposition to God, it’s use of violence against innocents and of course because it is not self sustainable economically.

What Francis would prefer to see are economic systems where the government doesn’t turn a blind eye to the greed of the super rich and while forgetting the poor. Since it has already been established that Frances firmly opposes Marxism for many reasons the only other solution is a “moral capitalism” with social services. In fact this is very similar to what many countries in Europe and the US have now but he would like to see checks on gross abuses such as what happened in the US and the housing market lending scandal.

In summary, Pope Francis perspective is definitely one of someone from a country with almost no social services who opposes unbridled capitalism while also being ideologically opposed to godless Marxism and it’s failed economic model.

Firstly, the fact that pope Francis is opposed to Marxism is hardly much of a qualification. And, at least up until Pope Francis, the Church has never taken the position that Communism and Capitalism formed opposite, equally wrong, poles on an economic scale. In practice, of course, Catholics have generally pursued “Third Way” economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe.

The burden ought not be on Catholics around the world to interpret the words of the Pope in terms of his origins. The reality is, of course, that you are probably right and, if anything, you understate the case.

Argintina is not merely a country with almost no social services as we find in the develpped world welfare states, it is a country that has, since the 1930s, toyed with its own Third Way experiments that borrowed directly from fascism.

Latin America generally is simiarly not merely without social programs, it is riven with corruption and ossified social structures. This was the case from its colonial origins and little changed wiith independence. Latin America never embraced capitalism as we in the anglosphere understand it. The idea of limited government is entirely alien in that part of the world. Lack of social services is not the consequence of some principled adherence to free markets or a preference for private enterprise.

Latin America has flirted with Marxism, however. Liberation Theology was a Latin American movement. I belive the pope when he says he is not a Marxist. I believe he knows what Marxism is. But I don’t have the same confidence that he understands capitalism, free markets, or even civil society. I think he is attacking a straw man.

 

[Catolico65]

Firstly, the fact that pope Francis is opposed to Marxism is hardly much of a qualification. And, at least up until Pope Francis, the Church has never taken the position that Communism and Capitalism formed opposite, equally wrong, poles on an economic scale. In practice, of course, Catholics have generally pursued “Third Way” economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe.

The burden ought not be on Catholics around the world to interpret the words of the Pope in terms of his origins. The reality is, of course, that you are probably right and, if anything, you understate the case.

Argintina is not merely a country with almost no social services as we find in the develpped world welfare states, it is a country that has, since the 1930s, toyed with its own Third Way experiments that borrowed directly from fascism.

Latin America generally is simiarly not merely without social programs, it is riven with corruption and ossified social structures. This was the case from its colonial origins and little changed wiith independence. Latin America never embraced capitalism as we in the anglosphere understand it. The idea of limited government is entirely alien in that part of the world. Lack of social services is not the consequence of some principled adherence to free markets or a preference for private enterprise.

Latin America has flirted with Marxism, however. Liberation Theology was a Latin American movement. I belive the pope when he says he is not a Marxist. I believe he knows what Marxism is. But I don’t have the same confidence that he understands capitalism, free markets, or even civil society. I think he is attacking a straw man.

What is troubling to Francis based on his perceptive isn’t the capitalism but it’s unbridled greed.

As far as economic models out there there are two extremes, capitalism and communism with of course combinations of the two to various degrees and Francis is quite aware of this. I’m certain his preferred system would be a form of socialism with free market capitalism but reigned in to prevent abuse and volatility. In reality, many countries in Europe have similar socialist free market systems and the US is not far away.

BTW, I think it is really difficult to understand the point of view of Francis I am trying to portray unless one has lived in a Latin America country and understand the language, politics and culture. I live in the Dominican Republic btw.

 

[KSU]

Great posts, Catolico65 and Bubba Switzler. Just a few comments:

Catolico65: “[Pope Francis] would like to see checks on gross abuses such as what happened in the US and the housing market lending scandal.”

While those were in fact gross abuses, they were not abuses spawned by regulated Capitalism. They were abuses (and their after effects) forced upon an over regulated and cowed housing market by Democratic Socialists in order to garner votes from the “poor” who otherwise couldn’t afford houses. As is always the case in the U. S., the abuse ultimately fell upon innocent taxpayers and others.

Bubba Switzler: “In practice, of course, Catholics have generally pursued “Third Way” economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe.”

I hope that was sarcasism.

Bubba Switzler: “The burden ought not be on Catholics around the world to interpret the words of the Pope in terms of his origins. The reality is, of course, that you [Catolico65] are probably right and, if anything, you understate the case.”

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Bubba Switzler: “In practice, of course, Catholics have generally pursued “Third Way” economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe.”

I hope that was sarcasism.

You be the judge:

The fascists opposed both international socialism and liberal capitalism, arguing that their views represented a third way. They claimed to provide a realistic economic alternative that was neither laissez-faire capitalism nor communism.[13]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism#General_characteristics_of_fascist_economies

But wait!

Perón’s admiration for Mussolini is well documented.[7] Many scholars categorize Peronism as a fascist ideology.[8] Carlos Fayt believes that Peronism was just “an Argentine implementation of Italian fascism”.[8] Hayes reaches the conclusion that “the Peronist movement produced a form of fascism that was distinctively Latin American”.[8]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peronism

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

BTW, I think it is really difficult to understand the point of view of Francis I am trying to portray unless one has lived in a Latin America country and understand the language, politics and culture. I live in the Dominican Republic btw.

I fear, though, that if Latin Americans and Anglo Americans are speaking differenet economic and historical “languages” that the misunderstanding runs both ways. Latin America has no history of free market capitalism. It does, though, have a history of authoritarian dictatorships of both the left and right.

 

[Catolico65]

I fear, though, that if Latin Americans and Anglo Americans are speaking differenet economic and historical “languages” that the misunderstanding runs both ways. Latin America has no history of free market capitalism. It does, though, have a history of authoritarian dictatorships of both the left and right.

With all due respect the number of LA countries that have for the majority of goods free market capitalism are too numerous, after all nothing else is sustainable and people have to eat.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

With all due respect the number of LA countries that have for the majority of goods free market capitalism are too numerous, after all nothing else is sustainable and people have to eat.

Would you describe Argentina as a free market capitalist economy?

 

[Catolico65]

Would you describe Argentina as a free market capitalist economy?

Why not? Their wealth is generated by free market trade. If anything Cuba and Venezuela are the most socialist countries, and it shows. Cuba is a disaster and the chavistas are watching as the infrastructure deteriorates and wonder how they are going to feed all the multiple bellies they have bought that seem to multiply and multiply. Argentina is a different story. There is a wave of secular progressivism gripping LA where governments are starting to try to implement more socials services and increase taxes but they soon find out about the problem of diminishing returns.

 

[KSU]

You be the judge:

OK, I’ll be the judge. Justice KSU holds as follows:

When you said, “Catholics have generally pursued ‘Third Way’ economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe” you were talking about three forms of a Fascist and/or Socialist mix, and thus, by definition of the popes, not systems generally pursued by authentic Catholics. Ditto for Peronism .

It was the Catholic reference I assumed you were being sarcastic about.

BTW, portions of the Wikipedia definitions of fascism in your links hit a little too close to home and gave me the willies.

Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

Sir John Harrington

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Why not? Their wealth is generated by free market trade. If anything Cuba and Venezuela are the most socialist countries, and it shows. Cuba is a disaster and the chavistas are watching as the infrastructure deteriorates and wonder how they are going to feed all the multiple bellies they have bought that seem to multiply and multiply. Argentina is a different story. There is a wave of secular progressivism gripping LA where governments are starting to try to implement more socials services and increase taxes but they soon find out about the problem of diminishing returns.

Well, see, this is why I think miscommunication is a two way street. What you mean by “free market capitalism” is simply anything other than Marxism.

Most economists classify Europe and the US as mixed economies, meaning partly private, partly public. In the case of Europe, the government controls up to half of spending and thats not counting regulations. The US is right behind.

But compared to the US America, Argentina is anything but a free market. Review the power that the president wields over the economy, arbitrarily seizing savings, shutting down businesses that dont play ball, etc.

For a good cross comparison, see:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Notice that most of Latin America, including Pope Francis home of Argentina, is “mostly not free”.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

OK, I’ll be the judge. Justice KSU holds as follows:

When you said, “Catholics have generally pursued ‘Third Way’ economics blazed by such economic luminaries as Bennito Mussilino and Adolf Hitler but since given a more respectable pedigree by the Christian Democrat parties of Europe” you were talking about three forms of a Fascist and/or Socialist mix, and thus, by definition of the popes, not systems generally pursued by authentic Catholics. Ditto for Peronism .

It was the Catholic reference I assumed you were being sarcastic about.

BTW, portions of the Wikipedia definitions of fascism in your links hit a little too close to home and gave me the willies.

Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

Sir John Harrington

Well, I was certainly not accusing any pope or other Catholic of holding fascist views but, yes, I was only half joking. The crusade seeking a Third Way has some questionable company. Peronism is obviously not bent on conquest but it was inspired by fascism.

 

[KSU]

The crusade seeking a Third Way has some questionable company.

Amen, including those who know better :

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=20159

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Amen, including those who know better :

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=20159

Looks like an interesting book. I just wish I were more confident that Pope Francis was making these finer distinctions. At this point I honestly don’t know and certainly his words are being used by those who seek to obscure all distinction.

 

[Catolico65]

Well, see, this is why I think miscommunication is a two way street. What you mean by “free market capitalism” is simply anything other than Marxism.

Most economists classify Europe and the US as mixed economies, meaning partly private, partly public. In the case of Europe, the government controls up to half of spending and thats not counting regulations. The US is right behind.

But compared to the US America, Argentina is anything but a free market. Review the power that the president wields over the economy, arbitrarily seizing savings, shutting down businesses that dont play ball, etc.

For a good cross comparison, see:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Notice that most of Latin America, including Pope Francis home of Argentina, is “mostly not free”.

This really isn’t true my friend. I read the news in Spanish every day. While Argentina may be doing some private property grabs it isn’t as bad as Venezuela. The fact is most Latinamericans, including Argentinians get most of their daily goods from free market trade where the government often times is not even involves, such as local produce and meats. For this reason people in poor countries are able to eat because it is so cheap. Peace.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

This really isn’t true my friend. I read the news in Spanish every day. While Argentina may be doing some private property grabs it isn’t as bad as Venezuela. The fact is most Latinamericans, including Argentinians get most of their daily goods from free market trade where the government often times is not even involves, such as local produce and meats. For this reason people in poor countries are able to eat because it is so cheap. Peace.

You are correct that Argentina is not as bad as Venezuala. You are mistaken that one cannot draw further distinctions than that. While Latin America is well represented in the “mostly not free” category the only country that ranks well is Chile.

Here is a list of industires nationalzed by Argentina:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization#Argentina

The example that touched most people was the nationalization of pensions.

But that merely represents the most extreme form of government meddling in trade. Other examples include high tarrifs (protectionism), capital controls (limiting saving and investment options), legal burdens to form new companies and law and policy forvoring firms with political connections (crony capitalism), and bribery (corruption).

These and more combine to make a mockery of “free market” capitalism in Argentina and other Latin American countries.

If you’d like to know what genuine free market capitalism is, read here: es.acton.org

More on Agentina:

heritage.org/index/country/argentina

 

[Kaninchen]

Nothing to do with me, really, but is the whole ‘Pope Francis is a Marxist’ business taken vaguely seriously outside the United States?