Is Capitalism God-Ordained?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yohji
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you owned stock in a large insurance company offering health insurance, wouldn’t you approve of representatives of your company being at the table? You want to earn as much profit as you can, don’t you?
Sure-- but these higher profits of insurance companies will be indirectly paid as you said, through higher taxes (since the government has become final guarantor), and higher premiums (contrary to the sales job). You see, after 25 years of managed care the consumer finally was navigating the system just fine. E.g. eroded margins… Obamacare happened because the insurance companies needed it.
 
I said I don’t expect to comply with EPA regulations because I don’t own a power plant, but if I did, I would have to comply along with everyone else who owns a power plant. The regulation applies to all.
Nice try…

The regulation does not apply to me or to you. The EPA regulation applies ONLY to the owners and operators of coal fired power plants.

Now if congress passed a LAW simply stating that no one shall pollute the environment and violate the rights of others who use the environment. Then that LAW would apply to all…and the entire EPA would be unnecessary…and the taxes supporting that agency could be put to better use…and power companies would save the expense of complying with the mountains of EPA paperwork…and our energy bills would drop therefore providing a benefit to all.

Now if you were burning the wrong stuff in your fireplace and someone complained…the Sheriff could take you to jail. Same with the power company down the street …pollute…and the Sheriff locks up the owner, operator, and executive staff.

That is how objective law works in a TRUE Capitalist/Free Market Society. Of course no true, self-respecting Capitalist would dream of violating the rights of another.
 
Excellent point… And by nature in you hold something, you have fenced it off, you are not sharing… you are excluding others. You need the security of the state to protect your property. That is capitalism, and it is not fully congruous with freedom.
Please do not misunderstand my position. Private property is an intrinsic right. If there is no private ownership of goods and services then why am I told to give of myself for others in acts of charity? That means there is value ascribed in what I do, what I make and what I own that it holds that value when I willingly give to others who may not have what I own. Capitalism is not congruous with anything, it is a system of capital management just like socialism. For true capitalism, however, freedom is a requirement. A misconception would be the idea that there can be freedowm without respect to property rights. Capitalism cannot function without freedom. Freedom cannot function under socialism.

It is also apparant that you have either not read, or chose to not believe, the idea of equally beneficial exchange in a free market. If I have an extra blanket and you have some extra apples and we trade we have both willfully given something to the other in exchange for something we perceive as valuable to us. I am now fed, you are now warm. We both benefit. There does not need to be an outside law crafted by a governing body to concern itself with such a transaction. The belief that a law must exist for such a transaction to be considered fair means that now there is an element of coersion where there was none before, and it is no longer free.
 
I think people are confusing Capitalism with a Free Market. In absense of outside influences and regulations, in the absense of government management a free market works by willful exchanges of good and services. Because the exchanges are willful both parties receive a benefit. That is not capitalism. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. That can exist in a regulated market, as in the United States.
👍
I agree, but I would argue that the Capitalism that exists in the U.S. today is not true Capitalism simply because it is regulated.

When I say “Capitalism,” I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire Capitalism—with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.
 
If I have an extra blanket and you have some extra apples and we trade we have both willfully given something to the other in exchange for something we perceive as valuable to us. I am now fed, you are now warm. We both benefit. There does not need to be an outside law crafted by a governing body to concern itself with such a transaction. The belief that a law must exist for such a transaction to be considered fair means that now there is an element of coersion where there was none before, and it is no longer free.
I like that you know-- the idea of barter. Now there is a free market! And when you say “the belief that a law must exist for such a transaction means that now there is an element of coercion” you are also singing my song!

It is just that the private property as construed under Capitalism, is more of a burden than private property under Distributism. It creates deficits for both the haves and the have-not’s, and is not congruous to freedom.
 
Please explain how private ownership creates deficits. I am curious to understand where you are coming from.
Well, we have fences and gates and taxes. We have the most guns, the most police forces and the most prisons. And it is all to take care of property rights. As with everything else about our Capitalism, there just seems to be too much. Can’t there always be too much, of any good thing?
 
Nice try…

The regulation does not apply to me or to you. The EPA regulation applies ONLY to the owners and operators of coal fired power plants.
It applies to everyone. If the regulation said, “These regulations only apply to these people who own power plants but not to these other people who own power plants.”, then the regulation would not apply to all. But it doesn’t say that. You are just arguing semantics.
 
Heads up!!! I never used the word “equal”.

If the market is unwilling, so be it.

The market is always able. The “bailouts” just prevent the market from working like the market is able to work without the “bailout”.
No, sometimes the market is unable to correct itself. It has nothing do with bailouts.
 
It applies to everyone. If the regulation said, “These regulations only apply to these people who own power plants but not to these other people who own power plants.”, then the regulation would not apply to all. But it doesn’t say that. You are just arguing semantics.
What does it say? You seem to know. How about providing a quote from the EPA regulation itself. Or would that prove that you are just making things up to annoy me.
 
Peace be with you,

In my experience, Catholics and other Christians are unanimously in favor of capitalism and view all alternatives as anti-Christian. I was wondering if anyone could explain this to me? What is Christ-like about capitalism? Is it the only Church-approved economic system? Why do you think is there so much greed, corruption, poverty and social inequality in capitalist societies? I’m just looking for some explanations, because I’ve never had a fellow Catholic explain why they believe capitalism is ideal. Scripture and catechism citations in support of capitalism would be great! Thank you and blessings. 🙂
I would like at this point to bring in the OP’s original question.

I have read other threads on a similar vein and it always goes in the same direction - the superiority of capitalism in terms of economic efficiency by comparison to other economic systems. It is not what the OP is asking.

There is no economic system that is God ordained and there is no political theory that is God ordained. God did not ordain any of them - full stop. Let us not pretend God ordained capitalism - He did not. Neither did He ordain any other economic system or political theory. They are the thoughts of men - not God. To argue capitalism, or any other economic system is God ordained is nonsense.

There are certain principles contained in Christianity and every economic system, and political theory, is wanting in these principles. It is not the case capitalism embraces more Christian principles than any other. Whether or not an economic system embraces Christian principles is dependent on how it operates, not what the system is. It is true the Church calls for respect for private property rights, but that is where any argument God or the Church endorses capitalism ends. It can be argued centralization, communal living and other systems are less efficient or not suited to contemporary society to mention a few, but let us not delude ourselves that as an economic model, or more to the point a political model, neither God nor the Church approve of them and have a preference for capitalism on the ground it is more ‘Christian.’ Any man-made system or theory can be compatible with Christian principles irrespective of their efficiency as they are dependent on how they are put into practice by those who hold the greater part of power.
 
Minkymurph #627
It is not the case capitalism embraces more Christian principles than any other. Whether or not an economic system embraces Christian principles is dependent on how it operates, not what the system is. It is true the Church calls for respect for private property rights, but that is where any argument God or the Church endorses capitalism ends
as an economic model…neither God nor the Church approve of them and have a preference for capitalism on the ground it is more ‘Christian.’
In error.

“The Late Scholastics derived their ethical approach from the Thomist concept of the interrelatedness of natural law, ethics and economics.” (Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius, 1986, p 36-37).

Free enterprise economic development started in the great Catholic monastic estates of the ninth century, and a solid basis of economic Catholic thought developed from the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century the Late Scholastics who were Thomists (followers of St Thomas) “writing and teaching at the University of Salamanca in Spain, sought to explain the full range of human action and social; organization.” They “observed the existence of economic law, inexorable forces of cause and effect that operate very much as other natural laws. Over the course of several generations, they discovered and explained the laws of supply and demand, the cause of inflation, the operation of foreign exchange rates, and the subjective nature of economic value…” For these reasons Joseph Schumpeter applauded them as the first real economists. (Thomas E Woods Jr, The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 8).

As repeatedly shown St John Paul II emphatically affirms free enterprise and rejects the mistaken term “capitalism”, teaching that as “an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector… the answer is certainly in the affirmative…” Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

Since the effects of Original Sin taint every individual, it is only the virtuous who can apply virtuously any human endeavour even when based on natural laws as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has emphasised in Caritas et Veritate, 2009, #36:
“Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations. Admittedly, the market can be a negative force, not because it is so by nature, but because a certain ideology can make it so. It must be remembered that the market does not exist in the pure state. It is shaped by the cultural configurations which define it and give it direction. Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.”

It is ludicrous how often papal insights and reality are brushed aside for personal prejudices.
 
It’s not merely a “stance”. The teaching on the pursuit of economic growth to enable the improvement of societies is clear and irrefutable:
St John Paul II is clear in Centesimus Annus #42, 1991:
‘If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is equally clear and decisive and so precisely reveals the value of free enterprise and the market economy as the value of human dignity against human frailty, in Caritas et Veritate, 2009, #36:
Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations. Admittedly, the market can be a negative force, not because it is so by nature, but because a certain ideology can make it so. It must be remembered that the market does not exist in the pure state. It is shaped by the cultural configurations which define it and give it direction. Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.”
Great finds, Abu. Thanks. 👍
 
In error.

“The Late Scholastics derived their ethical approach from the Thomist concept of the interrelatedness of natural law, ethics and economics.” (Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius, 1986, p 36-37).

Free enterprise economic development started in the great Catholic monastic estates of the ninth century, and a solid basis of economic Catholic thought developed from the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century the Late Scholastics who were Thomists (followers of St Thomas) “writing and teaching at the University of Salamanca in Spain, sought to explain the full range of human action and social; organization.” They “observed the existence of economic law, inexorable forces of cause and effect that operate very much as other natural laws. Over the course of several generations, they discovered and explained the laws of supply and demand, the cause of inflation, the operation of foreign exchange rates, and the subjective nature of economic value…” For these reasons Joseph Schumpeter applauded them as the first real economists. (Thomas E Woods Jr, The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 8).

As repeatedly shown St John Paul II emphatically affirms free enterprise and rejects the mistaken term “capitalism”, teaching that as “an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector… the answer is certainly in the affirmative…” Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

Since the effects of Original Sin taint every individual, it is only the virtuous who can apply virtuously any human endeavour even when based on natural laws as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has emphasised in Caritas et Veritate, 2009, #36:
“Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations. Admittedly, the market can be a negative force, not because it is so by nature, but because a certain ideology can make it so. It must be remembered that the market does not exist in the pure state. It is shaped by the cultural configurations which define it and give it direction. Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.”

It is ludicrous how often papal insights and reality are brushed aside for personal prejudices.
Not in error.

I believe it has been established on this thread free enterprise and capitalism are not the same thing. It is ludicrous people think it is and is ludicrous to suggest people who don’t think any economic system is God-ordained do so out of prejudice.

Capitalism is not the only economic system that recognizes property rights and promotes free enterprise. It is an error to think it is. Respecting property rights and free enterprise may be elements of capitalism, but they are not the only elements. Two elements of an economic system approved by the Church does not equal the system in it’s entirety is God-ordained. It is an error to think it does.
 
Not in error.

I believe it has been established on this thread free enterprise and capitalism are not the same thing. It is ludicrous people think it is and is ludicrous to suggest people who don’t think any economic system is God-ordained do so out of prejudice.

Capitalism is not the only economic system that recognizes property rights and promotes free enterprise. It is an error to think it is. Respecting property rights and free enterprise may be elements of capitalism, but they are not the only elements. Two elements of an economic system approved by the Church does not equal the system in it’s entirety is God-ordained. It is an error to think it does.
Please tell us what other economic system promotes free enterprise and recognizes property rights.
 
Hi Murph:

I hope you have been well since we last talked…
Not in error.

I believe it has been established on this thread free enterprise and capitalism are not the same thing.
Actually it has been established on this thread that Capitalism is the word Karl Marx used to define the Free Market.
Capitalism is not the only economic system that recognizes property rights and promotes free enterprise. It is an error to think it is. Respecting property rights and free enterprise may be elements of capitalism, but they are not the only elements. Two elements of an economic system approved by the Church does not equal the system in it’s entirety is God-ordained. It is an error to think it does.
Capitalism/Free Market offers much more than the recognition of God-given rights and free enterprise (or simply FREEDOM)

Pride, dignity, self-confidence and self-esteem are characteristics of a Capitalist society.

Actually Laissez-faire Capitalism is the only social system based on the recognition of individual rights and, therefore, the only system that bans force from social relationships. By the nature of its basic principles and interests, it is the only system fundamentally opposed to war.

Capitalism cannot work with slave labor. It leaves no possibility for any one to serve their own interests by enslaving others.

The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with mankind’s rational nature, that it protects our survival and that its ruling principle is: justice.

In all human relationships—private or public, spiritual or material, social or political or economic or moral—Capitalism requires that we be guided by the principle of justice.

So let’s see…we have:
Freedom.
Recognizing, respecting and protecting God-given rights
Pride, dignity, self-confidence and self-esteem = Nobel characteristics
Opposed to war
No slavery

A ruling principle of Justice.

It really does not get much better than that. 👍

But you are right to say that it is an error to think that any economic system is God-ordained. However, I would say that Capitalism is closer to God’s intentions for mankind than any other economic system to date. Therefore it SHOULD be God-ordained.
 
I would like at this point to bring in the OP’s original question.

I have read other threads on a similar vein and it always goes in the same direction - the superiority of capitalism in terms of economic efficiency by comparison to other economic systems. It is not what the OP is asking.

There is no economic system that is God ordained and there is no political theory that is God ordained. God did not ordain any of them - full stop. Let us not pretend God ordained capitalism - He did not. Neither did He ordain any other economic system or political theory. They are the thoughts of men - not God. To argue capitalism, or any other economic system is God ordained is nonsense.

There are certain principles contained in Christianity and every economic system, and political theory, is wanting in these principles. It is not the case capitalism embraces more Christian principles than any other. Whether or not an economic system embraces Christian principles is dependent on how it operates, not what the system is. It is true the Church calls for respect for private property rights, but that is where any argument God or the Church endorses capitalism ends. It can be argued centralization, communal living and other systems are less efficient or not suited to contemporary society to mention a few, but let us not delude ourselves that as an economic model, or more to the point a political model, neither God nor the Church approve of them and have a preference for capitalism on the ground it is more ‘Christian.’ Any man-made system or theory can be compatible with Christian principles irrespective of their efficiency as they are dependent on how they are put into practice by those who hold the greater part of power.
Allow me not to be seen as mocking prayer, when I respond to your explanation: AMEN!
 
Is society obligated to support those who do not or cannot support themselves? Is society obligated to bail out those who make poor decisions?
 
Hi Murph:

Capitalism/Free Market offers much more than the recognition of God-given rights and free enterprise (or simply FREEDOM)

Pride, dignity, self-confidence and self-esteem are characteristics of a Capitalist society.

Actually Laissez-faire Capitalism is the only social system based on the recognition of individual rights and, therefore, the only system that bans force from social relationships. By the nature of its basic principles and interests, it is the only system fundamentally opposed to war.

Capitalism cannot work with slave labor. It leaves no possibility for any one to serve their own interests by enslaving others.

The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with mankind’s rational nature, that it protects our survival and that its ruling principle is: justice.

In all human relationships—private or public, spiritual or material, social or political or economic or moral—Capitalism requires that we be guided by the principle of justice.

So let’s see…we have:
Freedom.
Recognizing, respecting and protecting God-given rights
Pride, dignity, self-confidence and self-esteem = Nobel characteristics
Opposed to war
No slavery

A ruling principle of Justice.

It really does not get much better than that… Therefore it SHOULD be God-ordained.
ZC, the problem with capitalism, especially as built up and embellished in the US, is its ORDER of the priorities. There is nothing wrong with property rights and efficiency, but when they dominate and subsume what should be more the important rights, and override morality, then we have a problem. And to claim that capitalism somehow is incompatible with slavery etc is simply dead wrong. If you don’t think the US has tens of millions of indentured people as we speak, you are living in a fantasy world.
 
ZC, the problem with capitalism, especially as built up and embellished in the US, is its ORDER of the priorities. There is nothing wrong with property rights and efficiency, but when they dominate and subsume what should be more the important rights, and override morality, then we have a problem. And to claim that capitalism somehow is incompatible with slavery etc is simply dead wrong. If you don’t think the US has tens of millions of indentured people as we speak, you are living in a fantasy world.
Remember, Capitalism doesn’t exist in the U.S. today, but if it did…

Property rights as well as individual rights are sacrosanct in a Capitalist society. What other rights could possibly be more important?
Capitalism is morally justified because it is in in harmony with the nature of mankind.

Please, just so I understand…give me an example of these "indentured’ people you mention
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top