Is there any difference between a Communist and a Leftist?

[Tony_the_mad]

No Cricket, it is not naive at all…it is very reasonable to expect the Church to be the most effective manager of charity distribution.

Any religious organization (and some private charities) are spared the overhead of executive salaries and labor since most all work is done by volunteers. A religious organization can be selective in their service or giving. They can also react quickly rather than wait for a bureaucracy to stall things in order to justify their existence.

A government, on the other hand cannot be selective. It must be broad and that opens up the greatest argument against government distributing charitable goods and services…FRAUD, WASTE and ABUSE. That is rampant in any government welfare program.

I really don’t see any need for the Church to change anything regarding her management of charitable funds…but if you have any suggestions I would love to hear them.

As a general rule, government charity has less FRAUD, WASTE and ABUSE than most private or even religious charities. As far as I know statistics bear this out by a wide margin. Government executives almost always make significantly less money than their private or even in many case religious counter parts. Government overhead is as a general very low. Government also has more power to prevent fraud, both internally and externally as well. Fraud is endemic in many private charities for instance. The same is true for waste, mostly because the government does not need to advertise. The greatest single waste in charities is advertising, period.

Any objective measure, of fraud, waste, and abuse simply does not fit your stereotype. The government definitely has all three but you are selectively ignoring the very real and on average worse fraud, waste, and abuse that the private and religious charities have.

I have already dealt with my opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of both government and religious charities, above. Further you can find ways that I think that our Church can improve its charity. (Mainly by increasing the amount being donated and the reach of the Church into areas that most need our help.)

 

[St_Francis]

As a general rule, government charity has less FRAUD, WASTE and ABUSE than most private or even religious charities. As far as I know statistics bear this out by a wide margin. Government executives almost always make significantly less money than their private or even in many case religious counter parts. Government overhead is as a general very low. Government also has more power to prevent fraud, both internally and externally as well. Fraud is endemic in many private charities for instance. The same is true for waste, mostly because the government does not need to advertise. The greatest single waste in charities is advertising, period.

Any objective measure, of fraud, waste, and abuse simply does not fit your stereotype. The government definitely has all three but you are selectively ignoring the very real and on average worse fraud, waste, and abuse that the private and religious charities have.

I have never heard this before. Do you have a source for this information?

I have already dealt with my opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of both government and religious charities, above. Further you can find ways that I think that our Church can improve its charity. (Mainly by increasing the amount being donated and the reach of the Church into areas that most need our help.)

 

[Cricket2]

I have never heard this before. Do you have a source for this information?

I never heard it either. My own impression is that they are all just about equally fraudulent given that sinful people are in charge or responsible for all of them. I don’t care if it is the government, npo or the churches they are all guilty of it at some level, and to think that either one is better than the other just because it is the government or the Church is unrealistic.

 

[JB_Dugan]

As a general rule, government charity has less FRAUD, WASTE and ABUSE than most private or even religious charities. As far as I know statistics bear this out by a wide margin. Government executives almost always make significantly less money than their private or even in many case religious counter parts. Government overhead is as a general very low. Government also has more power to prevent fraud, both internally and externally as well. Fraud is endemic in many private charities for instance. The same is true for waste, mostly because the government does not need to advertise. The greatest single waste in charities is advertising, period.

Any objective measure, of fraud, waste, and abuse simply does not fit your stereotype. The government definitely has all three but you are selectively ignoring the very real and on average worse fraud, waste, and abuse that the private and religious charities have.

I have already dealt with my opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of both government and religious charities, above. Further you can find ways that I think that our Church can improve its charity. (Mainly by increasing the amount being donated and the reach of the Church into areas that most need our help.)

Tony, old sport, there is really no such thing as a government “charity”

What the government provides is WELFARE.

Along with MASSIVE fraud waste and abuse the government provided welfare system has only managed to keep an entire culture (the poor) in a constant state of dependence.

I could go on, but I don’t think we want to go down that road…

 

[livingwordunity]

No Cricket, it is not naive at all…it is very reasonable to expect the Church to be the most effective manager of charity distribution.

Any religious organization (and some private charities) are spared the overhead of executive salaries and labor since most all work is done by volunteers. A religious organization can be selective in their service or giving. They can also react quickly rather than wait for a bureaucracy to stall things in order to justify their existence.

A government, on the other hand cannot be selective. It must be broad and that opens up the greatest argument against government distributing charitable goods and services…FRAUD, WASTE and ABUSE. That is rampant in any government welfare program.

I really don’t see any need for the Church to change anything regarding her management of charitable funds…but if you have any suggestions I would love to hear them.

Well said!

And for my original question, I still haven’t seen anyone give a real example of what a leftist believes in that a communist doesn’t believe.

 

[carpenter383]

Yes it does.

Sure - I would define excessive regulations on business as those regulations which serve no good end and force businesses to move or close shop. Here is a good article in the excellent magazine, the Economist, on the topic of “green regulations.” It should be noted that the Economist is not a “right-wing” magazine.

economist.com/node/21547804

Yes, I would define excessive government entitlement programs as those which make matters worse and encourage dependency, as well as become a drain on the fiscal health of the country.

The govt passing programs/laws for manipulating societal behavior to achieve a desired outcome. Basically the government trying to run people’s lives. For example, rather than let the market decide who should qualify for a loan, the government, under Jimmy Carter, passed the Community Reinvestment Act which encouraged lending institutions to make sub-prime loans to unqualified borrowers - underrepresented minorities, with the guarantee that in the event that the borrower defaulted on the loan, the govt would use taxpayer money to make whole the lenders. Thus - the govt used social engineering to try to help increase minority home ownership (instead of needing to qualify for a loan based on financial fitness). Of course this led to the sub-prime mortgage bust train wreck in 2008, in spite of conservative (right-wing) efforts to reform CRA under Bush, but to no avail.

My experience with “anti-abortion” leftists is that they end up voting for pro-abortion leftists anyway. As such, their anti-abortion views are highly suspect, imo.

Yes, I would consider those views pretty far to the left. But I realize the spectrum is relative. To a Marxist-Leninist, your views might be considered moderate. To a conservative in America, your views would be considered leftist.

I don’t know the status of the abortion issue in the UK. But in America, we find lefty Catholics who say the same thing as you: they are for all the socialism, but by golly, they are against abortion and gay marriage! Problem is, when it comes time to vote, they faithfully vote for the leftist candidates (who are always pro-abortion/pro-gay marriage). In other words, their leftism supersedes their supposed commitment to Catholic moral principles.

Ishii

My thoughts exactly

 

[St_Francis]

Well said!

And for my original question, I still haven’t seen anyone give a real example of what a leftist believes in that a communist doesn’t believe.

Communists believe that the workers will become so oppressed under “capitalism” that they will rise up and overthrow the capitalists and throw them out and then the government will take over the means of production (socialism), but then the government eventually withering away leaving a self-running economc system.

Leftists do not all believe in the rising up of the workers, and some leftists have been nationalistic, thinking that there is more connection between members of the same nation but different classes than there s among the same classes in different nations.

Communists believe in a violent revolution as a precursor to the temporary state of socialism. Not all leftists believe that violence is necessary for the imposition of socialism.

And communists believe that the end will result in the withering away of the state, while many leftists believe that socialism is the end/goal and that the state will not disappear.

So, while there are many similarities between leftists and communists, for varied reasons, communism remains an off-shoot of leftist thinking.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Government charity is an oxymoron. No such thing as charity at the point of a gun. Charity is that which is voluntarily given. Giving to the government to redistribute is not voluntary. You don’t want to contribute, you’re welcome to check out your state’s penitentiaries. On the other hand, all contributions to your local parish, food pantry, etc., are voluntary. You don’t contribute, you might have to answer to God in the end, but no one’s going to point a gun at you.

Communism and socialism are rooted in envy. Aka “crab” mentality. Not to mention a violation of the Tenth Commandment. Lots of coveting their neighbors’ goods and money involved.

 

[livingwordunity]

Government charity is an oxymoron. No such thing as charity at the point of a gun. Charity is that which is voluntarily given. Giving to the government to redistribute is not voluntary. You don’t want to contribute, you’re welcome to check out your state’s penitentiaries. On the other hand, all contributions to your local parish, food pantry, etc., are voluntary. You don’t contribute, you might have to answer to God in the end, but no one’s going to point a gun at you.

Communism and socialism are rooted in envy. Aka “crab” mentality. Not to mention a violation of the Tenth Commandment. Lots of coveting their neighbors’ goods and money involved.

Awesome post!

 

[estesbob]

Government charity is an oxymoron. No such thing as charity at the point of a gun. Charity is that which is voluntarily given. Giving to the government to redistribute is not voluntary. You don’t want to contribute, you’re welcome to check out your state’s penitentiaries. On the other hand, all contributions to your local parish, food pantry, etc., are voluntary. You don’t contribute, you might have to answer to God in the end, but no one’s going to point a gun at you.

Communism and socialism are rooted in envy. Aka “crab” mentality. Not to mention a violation of the Tenth Commandment. Lots of coveting their neighbors’ goods and money involved.

Unfortunately way too many people believe they can fulfill their personal obligation to help the poor by voting for someone who promise to take someone else money and do it for them

 

[Amandil]

I never heard it either. My own impression is that they are all just about equally fraudulent given that sinful people are in charge or responsible for all of them.

This is the sort of same fallacious thinking that says that God cannot inspire men to write infallibly. But we know that this is otherwise.

I don’t think that your ideas about how the Church performs her charitable work are accurate. All of the Church’s charitable works and how she deals with financial resources given by the people in the Church is governed by the principle of subsidiarity.

Have you ever looked up this principle?

I don’t care if it is the government, npo or the churches they are all guilty of it at some level, and to think that either one is better than the other just because it is the government or the Church is unrealistic.

How do you know?

 

[Cricket2]

This is the sort of same fallacious thinking that says that God cannot inspire men to write infallibly. But we know that this is otherwise.

I don’t think that your ideas about how the Church performs her charitable work are accurate. All of the Church’s charitable works and how she deals with financial resources given by the people in the Church is governed by the principle of subsidiarity.

Have you ever looked up this principle?

How do you know?

I find it amazing that people would believe that the Church would not have problems with fraud, theft and misuse of funds. She is just as likely to have that problem as any other agency that deals with people’s money. We had a local Catholic Charity shut down for just that sort of business.

Just because it is the Church, does not mean that she is immune to the sinfulness of those working under her. It is in the Church that I have personally witnessed some of the worst behavior and attitudes in my life. Racism, lying, people cheating on each other, domestic violence; you name it. Her money matters are certainly no exception.

 

[Amandil]

I find it amazing that people would believe that the Church would not have problems with fraud, theft and misuse of funds. She is just as likely to have that problem as any other agency that deals with people’s money. We had a local Catholic Charity shut down for just that sort of business.

I’m sorry, but that just seems like this is just a hasty generalization, conflating “exception” with the rule and blaming the Church as a whole for the actions of individuals.

Just because it is the Church, does not mean that she is immune to the sinfulness of those working under her.

I never said it was. But you continually refer to “the Church” as a corporate institution as being responsible for the bad actions of individuals in a parish. Not only is it ridiculous in light of subsidiarity, its simply unfair. You’re doing nothing but building a strawman.

It is in the Church that I have personally witnessed some of the worst behavior and attitudes in my life. Racism, lying, people cheating on each other, domestic violence; you name it. Her money matters are certainly no exception.

And after this you could apparently add “Pharisaicalism” to that as well…

I still fail to see how any of those examples supports your position that the Church is exclusively responsible for the acts of individuals who allegedly act fraudulently in regards to charitable funds.

 

[livingwordunity]

I’m sorry, but that just seems like this is just a hasty generalization, conflating “exception” with the rule and blaming the Church as a whole for the actions of individuals.

I never said it was. But you continually refer to “the Church” as a corporate institution as being responsible for the bad actions of individuals in a parish. Not only is it ridiculous in light of subsidiarity, its simply unfair. You’re doing nothing but building a strawman.

And after this you could apparently add “Pharisaicalism” to that as well…

I still fail to see how any of those examples supports your position that the Church is exclusively responsible for the acts of individuals who allegedly act fraudulently in regards to charitable funds.

Well said.

 

[Amandil]

In any case, I frankly find it absurd for anyone to compare the allegedly narrow instances of fraud within certain local Catholic charitable organizations with the overwhelming fraud of government institutions which literally cost taxpayers millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars every year.

And that’s not even touching upon the ridiculous government programs which waste even more millions and billions of dollars(as evidenced by the recent “stimulus” bills coming from both the GOP and the Dems).

Whether it be socialism, communism, or even “state-capitalism”, government acting as a charitable organization is a joke, because government, and those in government, first obligation is to themselves and their job security, not to the welfare of those in need. Government will always take care of itself before the needy, and it will always only give the smallest and most meager of benefits possible, of which the recipients are suppose to be so grateful for, while the government workers take in many times more in their salaries without batting an eye.

They essentially buy their job security through these meager entitlement programs and force those in need to be beholden to them. Which creates a permanent class of poor people that will constantly vote for those whom they are beholden to, thus they enslave an entire voting block to their whims.

 

[livingwordunity]

In any case, I frankly find it absurd for anyone to compare the allegedly narrow instances of fraud within certain local Catholic charitable organizations with the overwhelming fraud of government institutions which literally cost taxpayers millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars every year.

And that’s not even touching upon the ridiculous government programs which waste even more millions and billions of dollars(as evidenced by the recent “stimulus” bills coming from both the GOP and the Dems).

Whether it be socialism, communism, or even “state-capitalism”, government acting as a charitable organization is a joke, because government, and those in government, first obligation is to themselves and their job security, not to the welfare of those in need. Government will always take care of itself before the needy, and it will always only give the smallest and most meager of benefits possible, of which the recipients are suppose to be so grateful for, while the government workers take in many times more in their salaries without batting an eye.

They essentially buy their job security through these meager entitlement programs and force those in need to be beholden to them. Which creates a permanent class of poor people that will constantly vote for those whom they are beholden to, thus they enslave an entire voting block to their whims.

Again, I agree.

 

[JoelleWyserPrat]

The left communists take a far less authoritarian approach to socialism. They will stress the importance of social freedom, democracy, and sometimes reject the idea of a vanguard party.
They are a more anarchistic sort. They are also truer to Marx than the rest.
An example would be Luxemburgists.

The right communists are those who take the authoritarian approach. They will stress the importance of a vanguard party and the adherence to its authority. These are the communists that most are familiar with. Most of them cite Lenin as the father of their school. They deviate from Marx.
An example would be Stalinists and Maoists.

 

[Cricket2]

I’m sorry, but that just seems like this is just a hasty generalization, conflating “exception” with the rule and blaming the Church as a whole for the actions of individuals.

I never said it was. But you continually refer to “the Church” as a corporate institution as being responsible for the bad actions of individuals in a parish. Not only is it ridiculous in light of subsidiarity, its simply unfair. You’re doing nothing but building a strawman.

And after this you could apparently add “Pharisaicalism” to that as well…

I still fail to see how any of those examples supports your position that the Church is exclusively responsible for the acts of individuals who allegedly act fraudulently in regards to charitable funds.

Oh dear. The Church is a non-profit entity. Yes, yes she is the Bride of Christ, but she is run by human beings and sorry folks, this means the Church is just as likely to deal with fraud and theft as any other body, entity, corporation out there. If we can’t face that we can’t prevent it. The Catholic Church holds more property, land and physical wealth than any other organization out there.

Because all of those who work in offices, churches, rectories, schools are human there will be theft, lying, and scandal. The keep your head in the sand and pretend it won’t or can’t or isn’t happening is part of the same attitude and ignorance that allowed sexual misconduct and pedophilia to go unchecked until recently. Wake up.

 

[livingwordunity]

The keep your head in the sand and pretend it won’t or can’t or isn’t happening is part of the same attitude and ignorance that allowed sexual misconduct and pedophilia to go unchecked until recently. Wake up.

Actually, the rise in sexual misconduct in society is a symptom of the hedonist amoral culture that resulted from the liberal so-called “sexual revolution”.

 

[JB_Dugan]

Oh dear. The Church is a non-profit entity. Yes, yes she is the Bride of Christ, but she is run by human beings and sorry folks, this means the Church is just as likely to deal with fraud and theft as any other body, entity, corporation out there. If we can’t face that we can’t prevent it. The Catholic Church holds more property, land and physical wealth than any other organization out there.

Because all of those who work in offices, churches, rectories, schools are human there will be theft, lying, and scandal. The keep your head in the sand and pretend it won’t or can’t or isn’t happening is part of the same attitude and ignorance that allowed sexual misconduct and pedophilia to go unchecked until recently. Wake up.

That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Pretty powerful words, from The Man Himself…"… and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I’ll stick with my Church through hell and high water.

PS: Happy Boxing Day