Is Capitalism God-Ordained?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yohji
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that is a wonderful way to look at things but what we are talking about is not what you or I think or feel. We are talking about relations between people. How we relate to one another. In that case we can’t project our beliefs onto someone else. We have to treat them as their own person with their own morals and beliefs. A person to be persuaded, not coerced, not strong armed by government into giving up their God given rights.
Dear friend,

Agreed. we should not give up our God given rights. But what are those rights? Things are messed up. In the beginning none worried about rights, because they did not need to. The rights we have truly, and the lot of them, are dictated by nature. Gods Will is expressed through nature. I think we all need to obey the natural laws of nature, that is our rights. If all did this then there would be Paradise.

I see natural law or Gods law as the laws of physics as it pertains to human behaviour. When people break these laws, it causes chaos, evil, and we are stuck trying and fighting to make sure not just us, but all, and a fallen world indeed too, act and behave naturally.

For the time being we have to work things out as best we can. I speak of ideals unachievable right now, but individually we, me too, can always improve, as we strive for Christian perfection, which is really just being the yourself your supposed to be, a true little human being that is me, especially me. Those are my thoughts, happy to go on discussing if you, or any would want…

Adios…

Blessings & peace 👍
 
Mr. Russell, don’t listen to the naysayers on your concept. You have found the root, the untouchable third rail of this discussion.

We can’t take it with us, and to hold onto it while we are here is in fact a giant piece of overhead that the capitalist equation can’t account for, and which has nature as it’s biggest victim. A giant piece of overhead that few “libertarians” have noticed,. Private property the basis of freedom? What about the cost of police to defend it? What about each person’s cost to maintain it? Libertarians… hah!
Dear friend

Thanks. I guess I am a bit of a Libertarian. But I am much more. I personally don’t accept lables, but I get you. I am a bit that way inclined, but I see myself as having infinite dimensions. Just some thoughts. God bless:thumbsup:

Adios…

Blessings & peace
 
Because those societies are populated by human beings. Do you think there is no corruption and poverty in socialist societies? Quite the contrary. There tends to be more corruption and poverty in government controlled systems precisely because of the incentives created in those societies. People are people regardless of the economic system they find themselves in.
Political and economic systems can have an influence on those who live under them, for good or evil. The influence of modern American corporate capitalism has in the balance been negative.
 
It is the confusion of this great free enterprise system with the goodness or badness of those engaging in enterprise which leads to false conclusions. Free enterprise is not “greed driven” it is common good driven for the welfare of the greatest number and dependant on consumer satisfaction and competition, dependant on the laws of cause and effect involving God-given reason, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.

It is knowledgeable, faithful Catholics who may best work in harmony with God’s natural law in free enterprise to achieve the common good of society, simply because they are open to the fullness of truth.

Catholic teaching supports free enterprise, based on the Catholic Late Scholastics who discovered and developed the natural laws of cause and effect in economics.

The Popes have some realization of the cause and effect of economic laws:
“If I were to pronounce on any single matter of a prevailing economic problem, I should be interfering with the freedom of men to work out their own affairs. Certain cases must be solved in the domain of facts, case by case as they occur…[M]en must realise in deeds those things, the principles of which have been placed beyond dispute…[T]hese things one must leave to the solution of time and experience.” [Pope Leo XIII. Quoted in *The Church And The Market, Dr Thomas E. Woods, Lexington Books, 2005, p 4].

Pius XI wrote of “matters of technique for which [the Church] is neither suitably equipped nor endowed by office.” Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, 41]….“economics and moral science employs each its own principles in its own sphere.” [QA, 42].

Again, Fr James V Schall, S.J., in Does The Catholic Church Still Exist?, Alba House 1994, points out re CA that “The very meaning of ‘options for the poor’ need no longer be ideological in overtones but directed instead to the very real possibilities for a poor people to overcome their own problems with the intelligent aid of those who know how to produce wealth in the first place.’ (p 178).

“If the first unique aspect of this Encyclical is its analysis of the real problem with totalitarianism, the second unique aspect is its willingness to accept the general principles of the market economy. The Pope insists that there are always many dangers of greed, selfishness, and materialism in this market system. No one needs to deny his point to recognise that he also calls attention to what have become commonplace among those who have sought to understand how modern societies develop their material bases.”

The economies of the West, led by the U.S.A., are widely considered to be “market” economies, but they are not the free enterprise economies arising from the Catholic Late Scholastics (“the ‘founders’ of scientific economics”) and the Austrian school of economics because these Western markets are deluged and deluded by interventionism.

Federal intervention in creating a feeling of prosperity stimulates the boom-bust cycle, resulting in an inevitable crash. The free market is always blamed for that crash. These artificial booms, wrote economist Henry Hazlitt, must end "in a crisis and a slump, and . . .worse than the slump itself may be the public delusion that the slump has been caused, not by the previous inflation, but by the inherent defects of ‘capitalism.’ "(What You Should Know About Inflation, 2nd ed., Van Nostrand, 1965, 18).

As Dr Thomas E Woods shows in Meltdown, Regnery Publishing, 2009, p 64, in* How Government Causes The Boom-Bust Cycle*: “It’s not ‘capitalism’. It’s not ‘greed’. It’s not ‘deregulation’. It’s an institution created by government itself.” And further (p 151), “And because as far as American politics is concerned, the Fed may as well not exist – and thus the Fed’s policies are essentially never a subject for debate in the American public square – the chaos it creates is inevitably blamed on ‘capitalism’ and made the pretext for additional rounds of government intervention.”

That is the reality.
 
Political and economic systems can have an influence on those who live under them, for good or evil. The influence of modern American corporate capitalism has in the balance been negative.
Compared to what better economic system?
 
It is the confusion of this great free enterprise system with the goodness or badness of those engaging in enterprise which leads to false conclusions. Free enterprise is not “greed driven” it is common good driven for the welfare of the greatest number and dependant on consumer satisfaction and competition, dependant on the laws of cause and effect involving God-given reason, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.
It is not only a confluence of good and bad people and action, it is a not a GREAT SYSTEM, but a good and bad system. It is only a SYSTEM, value-free, man-made. Who we have is the people who have mastered it (and whose logic made the system to begin with), and those who are left scratching their heads. Guess which half get the goods?

Consciousness and thoughfulness are God-given. Reason is not God-given, it is the fruit we took from the tree.
It is knowledgeable, faithful Catholics who may best work in harmony with God’s natural law in free enterprise to achieve the common good of society, simply because they are open to the fullness of truth.

Catholic teaching supports free enterprise, based on the Catholic Late Scholastics who discovered and developed the natural laws of cause and effect in economics.

The Popes have some realization of the cause and effect of economic laws:
“If I were to pronounce on any single matter of a prevailing economic problem, I should be interfering with the freedom of men to work out their own affairs. Certain cases must be solved in the domain of facts, case by case as they occur…[M]en must realise in deeds those things, the principles of which have been placed beyond dispute…[T]hese things one must leave to the solution of time and experience.” [Pope Leo XIII. Quoted in *The Church And The Market
, Dr Thomas E. Woods, Lexington Books, 2005, p 4].

Pius XI wrote of “matters of technique for which [the Church] is neither suitably equipped nor endowed by office.” Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, 41]….“economics and moral science employs each its own principles in its own sphere.” [QA, 42].

You have two eminent quotations, stating the Church’s neutralty in econmic controversies. Neither of these quotations says a SINGLE THING endorsing free enterprise or natural law as you claim is somehow exhibited in free enterprise.
Again, Fr James V Schall, S.J., in Does The Catholic Church Still Exist?, Alba House 1994, points out re CA that “The very meaning of ‘options for the poor’ need no longer be ideological in overtones but directed instead to the very real possibilities for a poor people to overcome their own problems with the intelligent aid of those who know how to produce wealth in the first place.’ (p 178).
Good idea, except that WE DO NOT HAVE a system that readily transfers such knowledge e.g. “intelligent aid” e.g. job re-training, is more of a socialist concept!
“If the first unique aspect of this Encyclical is its analysis of the real problem with totalitarianism, the second unique aspect is its willingness to accept the general principles of the market economy. The Pope insists that there are always many dangers of greed, selfishness, and materialism in this market system. No one needs to deny his point to recognise that he also calls attention to what have become commonplace among those who have sought to understand how modern societies develop their material bases.”
“Willingness to accept” is not a ringing endorsement, only a neutralist position. Meanwhile he “insists that there are always many dangers of greed, selfishness, and materialism in this market system.” Not glowing stuff… what was your point?
The economies of the West, led by the U.S.A., are widely considered to be “market” economies, but they are not the free enterprise economies arising from the Catholic Late Scholastics (“the ‘founders’ of scientific economics”) and the Austrian school of economics because these Western markets are deluged and deluded by interventionism.
Oh sure… Just like if you ask any communist, he will tell you: the Soviet Union was not pure communism. Here is the reality: in our economy, we have stultifying, corrupt bureaucracies, in private corporations as well as in government. The biggest corporations and government are intertwined.
Federal intervention in creating a feeling of prosperity stimulates the boom-bust cycle, resulting in an inevitable crash. The free market is always blamed for that crash. These artificial booms, wrote economist Henry Hazlitt, must end "in a crisis and a slump, and . . .worse than the slump itself may be the public delusion that the slump has been caused, not by the previous inflation, but by the inherent defects of ‘capitalism.’ "(What You Should Know About Inflation, 2nd ed., Van Nostrand, 1965, 18).

… That is the reality.
Boom and bust are as old as capitalism, and that is not a very good part. True that government fails to ameliorate cycles at all, as promised. Sometimes better, sometimes worse… Yes they sweep things under the rug-- on behalf of biggest corporations. Who keep them in office… etc etc around and around in a (non-virtuous) circle. That is the reality. You are right that markets are not working, but your corporate executives are not acting as good citizens, let alone good Christians. You cannot blame 9 to 5 government bureaucrats for rigging this game…
 
I’m glad someone mentioned this, i agree.

After all Communism and Capitalism while seemingly 100% different are just opposite sides of the same coin, early Capitalist’s (and many today) were the first on the secularist left.
Yes, Marxism was completely a reaction to problems of capitalism. Lost trades, diminished standards, pollution, etc… Unfortunately, Marx and Engels (and Max Weber), were not religious men. They were NOT seeking a more moral standard. They had the same “productivist”, materialist ethic as the capitalists themselves. They were trying to compete on the same level. (The Soviets in the end needed to extract labor too, except without the promise of personal gain.)

Today that battle is over, and we have some new choices to make.

What humankind needs to figure out (and quick), is a way to get happiness from less stuff. A first step is to quell all ambitions, and a next step is stop wringing our hands about employment, about “productivity”. Stop the false competitions… Start some art, practice some religion… Why should people be working so hard? All these capitalists on here, they are working so hard, but why? To accumulate a bunch of chintzy, disposable junk made in China, and a small pile of paper money that is just a pile of paper when their last day arrives? And the world should follow… Misery loves company!
 
Consciousness and thoughfulness are God-given. Reason is not God-given, it is the fruit we took from the tree.
I disagree. Reason is what separates us from animals.

Of course it is God-Given!

Reason integrates man’s perceptions by means of forming abstractions or conceptions, thus raising man’s knowledge from the perceptual level (which we share with animals) to the conceptual level, which we alone can reach.

If you believe that consciousness and thoughtfulness are God-given then you would have to agree that Reason, Purpose,and Self-esteem are God’s gifts on a higher order.

Reason, is our only tool of knowledge
Purpose, is our choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed to achieve
Self-esteem, is our inviolate certainty that we are competent to think and that we are worthy of happiness.
You are right that markets are not working, but your corporate executives are not acting as good citizens, let alone good Christians. You cannot blame 9 to 5 government bureaucrats for rigging this game…
This sounds like you mean ALL corporate executives…Come on Tom. I think you mean “some” or “just a few”. Right?

Yes, I can blame 9 to 5 government bureaucrats for rigging this game. Wthout them the game would be “un-riggable”.
 
Political and economic systems can have an influence on those who live under them, for good or evil. The influence of modern American corporate capitalism has in the balance been negative.
There is no objective reading of history that supports that. From the 19th century onward there has been a greater increase in the standard of living of the average working person that at any time in human history. What we classify here in America as poor is quite frankly a joke.

Tell this family



That the average “poor” family here in the states with their smart phones, televisions and ebt cards that they are poor and see what kind of reaction you get. And the reason the lower classes here in the States are as well off as they are is because of our largely free market economic system.
 
You are right that markets are not working, but your corporate executives are not acting as good citizens, let alone good Christians. You cannot blame 9 to 5 government bureaucrats for rigging this game…
Have you heard of the organization made up of billionaires who have pledged half their wealth to charity?
givingpledge.org/

If these “greedy” people did not follow their proclivities, the billions being donated to charity would not have been in existence.
 
ThomasJMullally #85
Reason is not God-given,
False. With such a profound error, no wonder so much of the feeling is skewed.

ENCYCLICAL LETTER FIDES ET RATIO OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FAITH AND REASON

tinyurl.com/46wut

“Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).

“Once reason successfully intuits and formulates the first universal principles of being and correctly draws from them conclusions which are coherent both logically and ethically, then it may be called right reason or, as the ancients called it, orthós logos, recta ratio.

“5. On her part, the Church cannot but set great value upon reason’s drive to attain goals which render people’s lives ever more worthy. She sees in philosophy the way to come to know fundamental truths about human life. At the same time, the Church considers philosophy an indispensable help for a deeper understanding of faith and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to those who do not yet know it.”
1998, St John Paul II.

“Although the knowledge of the natural order may be aided by revelation, reason must always be employed in the discovery of such knowledge.” Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius, 1986, p 38].
It is only a SYSTEM, value-free, man-made
The continued ignorance here is stupefying. It is only the application of free enterprise principles which has enabled so many millions to be raised above rank poverty. It is high time to listen to the revered Fr James V Schall, S.J., and learn of the reduction in poverty through free enterprise.

Do Christians Love Poverty?
August 16, 2013
Insisting that the only thing the poor need is bread consigns them to a world without signs of transcendence.
James V. Schall, S.J
.
Extract:
‘Whenever someone, religious or secular, tells us that he wants to “identify” with the poor, especially someone who has little clue about the causes of wealth and poverty, we can suspect that the poor are being used as a cloak to justify a political or personal agenda that needs careful examination.

‘In the course of history, two kinds of poverty, as it were, have been distinguished. In part, this distinction had to with the meaning of what we now call works of “charity.” That is, some people are poor because of natural or accidental defects in intelligence or health, whereby it was impossible for them to care for themselves and their own interests. Someone else had to care for them at least in part. This group was really what Aristotle meant by “slaves,” people by nature or accident who were unable to care for themselves.

‘The other group contained those who could care for themselves if they had an opportunity to do so. Ideally, they would be able to get themselves out of poverty if they lived in a place or in a system that allowed or encouraged them to do so. Not every economic or political system can or will do this.

‘Much of world poverty has in fact been reduced or alleviated, as a recent essay in *The Economist *has shown. Christians often seem not to know that this change has happened or why it happened.’
[tinyurl.com/ldjt6go]](http://tinyurl.com/ldjt6go])
Neither of these quotations says a SINGLE THING endorsing free enterprise or natural law as you claim is somehow exhibited in free enterprise.
“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).

Just as Christ’s Parable of the Talents most strikingly acknowledges Christ’s respect for the work of business, so does the Parable of the Dishonest Steward – the steward is dishonest, “but the nature of his work is not. In fact by praising his shrewdness, Christ admires his opportunism. While the steward abuses the trust his master extends to him, it must be recognised that the nature of the work that is entrusted to him is fundamentally good. The sin of the steward is his misuse of his master’s business, not the work of business itself.” Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 47].

That Jesus of Nazareth specifically shows us the value of energy, alertness, and perseverance in making a truly significant profit and looks with love on upon human work and that the work of the merchant – the businessman or the entrepreneur – is one of the forms of work that is affirmed. The parable of the talents makes this clear by its reference to money, trading, risk taking and banking. Laziness and avoiding risks and obstacles are condemned, so that the lessons for the spiritual life and attaining salvation are starkly revealed by these truisms.
 
No. I believe capitalism produces too much greed to be ordained by God.
 
No. I believe capitalism produces too much greed to be ordained by God.
Why do you think capitalism produces more greed that other economic systems? It seems to me man can be greedy in any economic system because it is an aspect of man’s sinful state. Not that you make this claim, but it seems to me many believe only the rich can be greedy. But this is not true. The poor can be just as greedy. In fact being greedy can often be a cause of poverty.
 
Why do you think capitalism produces more greed that other economic systems? It seems to me man can be greedy in any economic system because it is an aspect of man’s sinful state. Not that you make this claim, but it seems to me many believe only the rich can be greedy. But this is not true. The poor can be just as greedy. In fact being greedy can often be a cause of poverty.
Because I only have to look at the income disparity in the US today. At how much wealth is in the hands of the upper 1 or 2%. At corporate profits. At employers offering fewer benefits to their workers. Things like that.
 
Mr. Noe, the rationalization that you will see through this thread, is the the US is not true capitalism. I have disputed this vigorously.

The savage abuses of capitalism that have existed for 250 years, are inherent whether or not there is government bureaucracy. Today the worst abuses are in the private, corporate bureaucracies, which these people think somehow would melt away if only government was eviscerated. However deregulation since Reagan has not dissipated the abuses, they have grown. The intertwined public/ private bureaucracies that bilk and enslave the common man have burgeoned in my lifetime, but it is not enough for these people. They want everybody in the world to have that overarching ambition and greed, aspire to be capitalists-- that is what fuels the system. That is the jujitsu used on the 99%. (And meanwhile nature is being destroyed…)
 
Because I only have to look at the income disparity in the US today. At how much wealth is in the hands of the upper 1 or 2%. At corporate profits. At employers offering fewer benefits to their workers. Things like that.
Corporations are owned by stock holders. Anybody can own stock, even poor people. Is anybody who buys stock greedy? Those people who chose to buy things instead of stocks or bonds might just as well have poured their money into a rat hole. The money is gone once you have spent it. The fact that so much wealth is in the hands of the upper 1 or 2% is a testament to how many people throw their money away rather than invest it.

Capitalism is oriented toward wealth creation. Communism and Socialism are oriented toward taking away wealth rather than creating it.

My hunch is that the betterment of humanity is more likely to be God-ordained, and the taking away wealth once it has been created is not God-ordained.
 
Because I only have to look at the income disparity in the US today. At how much wealth is in the hands of the upper 1 or 2%. At corporate profits. At employers offering fewer benefits to their workers. Things like that.
Then you must believe that the US economy is a perfect example of a capitalist economy. I find this interesting because most would view the early US economy as capitalist and today’s economy as equally capitalist. And yet the economies are very different. I find most men define capitalism as whatever the US economy is at present.

I view the US as very fascist. This is a system where large corporations work with the government. In as much as the US is fascist it is not capitalist. I agree that corporations in modern America are a problem. But I don’t view that as being a necessary aspect of capitalism. In fact in the US the government works with corporations to use the law to create barriers of entry that maintain corporate power against competition.

In other economies there are also select citizens who have more than others. In an aristocracy this would be the nobility. In communism this would be the party leaders. It seems to me every economic system has concentration of wealth to some extent. But in capitalism you are actually free to compete to be one of those who has wealth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top