Michael Moore on socialism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually listened to better part of that video only to find there WAS no better part.

I think Forest Gump had an insight on that. Stupid is as…

Sigh
 
Don’t want to rebut it at all. It sounds like ethical Catholic teaching.
“Aren’t we smart enough to structure an economy that is run by the people, where the question is always asked: Is this for the common good? Is this good for people? And has a moral and ethical core to it?”
Click to expand...
I wish we had a society based on these principles, although what is considered “moral and ethical” varies depending upon who you ask. Everyone has different ideas on morality.
 
BoomerangToo said:
“Aren’t we smart enough to structure an economy that is run by the people, where the question is always asked: Is this for the common good? Is this good for people? And has a moral and ethical core to it?”
Click to expand...
No. We are not smart enough to run an economy that is composed of billions of minute and widespread transactions between millions of people every day. No human being or groups of human beings are capable of even categorizing all those transactions and decisions, much less attempting to direct them with greater efficiency than they have by virtue of the principles of self-interest.

“Is this for the common good?”

Suggesting that question “always” be asked reveals the ignorance of the sound-bite socialists like Michael Moore. Will that question even apply to the vast majority of economic purchases and activity? What does the decision of whether or not to buy a coffee before work have to do with the common good? Or whether to eat lunch at McDonalds or Burger King? Or whether I drive three more miles to get gas $0.10 cheaper or save time and pay a little more? The vast majority of economic decisions people make every day have nothing to do with the common good.

Even in the decisions that do concern the “common good” there is so much information that most times one can only haphazardly guess at the answer. Is it good for Wal-Mart to come into town? It’s good for some people. Lower prices are good. Cheaper food is good. Convenience of a superstore is good. But undercutting Mom and Pop is bad, or at least negative. Lower wages and corporate monopolies can be bad, or at least negative. Was there a net benefit to the “common good” or not? And that’s just one instance in God only knows how many.

As for whether a guiding morality can be applied to the marketplace… Sure, but only from the ground up. Top down morality doesn’t work. If every day average Joe is greedy and materialistic then it doesn’t matter whether a well-intentioned bureaucrat is in charge of policy or not because the real power lies in the hands of the faceless masses who make the vast majority of the decisions. If average Joe is charitable and God fearing than it doesn’t matter if the restrictions and regulations are lax or non-existent because the vast majority of decisions will be self-governed according to a Christian, egalitarian morality.
 
Last edited:
Certainly not I. Total and complete waste of time. The Church has ruled on all forms of “collectivism.” Need a catechism resource?
 
Maxirad said:
Do any CAF members want to rebut stuff Mr. Moore says about socialism in this video?
Click to expand...
So he thinks Socialism is a religion?

Capitalism has done a great job of creating wealth, and redistributing wealth

In socialist countries, the people don’t have a say in how things are run (one party elections)

I’m surprised you thought anything he said was noteworthy.

Why does socialism fail as a religion, and as an economic system?
It makes people selfish.

 
Last edited:
No.
I liked Michael Moore’s early Rust Belt movie and the book “Rivethead” by his friend. I grew up around that culture.
When he made himself the big pundit for everything, I lost interest in a hurry. Boring old blowhard.

Edited to add, I do give him a cookie for predicting Trump would win when nobody else thought so. I was thinking the same thing at the time.
 
Last edited:
Socialism is too scarily close to communism to me…I think a monarchy is the best form of government, similar to the way the Catholic Church is set up. Also similar to how the hierarchy in Heaven is as Jesus as King, Mary as Queen.
 
Why would I care what Michael Moore says on anything of substance?
If I want to watch a fat guy do funny things, then I’ll look for Michael Moore or John Belushi. If I want good solid thought Peter Kreeft is probably better.

Life is short, we should do what we’re good at.
 
misstherese said:
I think a monarchy is the best form of government, similar to the way the Catholic Church is set up.
Click to expand...
Yes, 'cause that’s worked so well throughout history.

Also, back when the Catholic Church actually had temporal power over some territory, it was kind of a disaster. Read up on the Papal States.
 
Some kings are saints. It wasn’t always a disaster. For much of the world democracy has been pretty disastrous. Look how “great” it’s been in democratic Iraq… or for that matter, certain fruits of democracy that would never have come to be under a Catholic monarchy… abortion and gay marriage come to mind.
Not that I would advocate for an absolute monarchy (though absolute monarchs were pretty rare in medieval Europe). Constitutional monarchy on the other hand…
 
twf said:
Some kings are saints. It wasn’t always a disaster. For much of the world democracy has been pretty disastrous. Look how “great” it’s been in democratic Iraq… or for that matter, certain fruits of democracy that would never have come to be under a Catholic monarchy… abortion and gay marriage come to mind.

Not that I would advocate for an absolute monarchy (though absolute monarchs were pretty rare in medieval Europe). Constitutional monarchy on the other hand…
Click to expand...
ROFL, so you skip every OECD country as an example of the benefits of a functional democracy and put your focus on Iraq, a fledgling democracy? Your logic is deeply tainted.
 
Nope, just using an extreme example to point out that democracy isn’t a miracle cure for a nation nor by any means divinely mandated. The Church opposed it until relatively recently.
Regardless, I said I supported constitutional monarchy… not a dictatorship or a theocracy. A constitutional monarchy has checks and balances. All modern real life examples are fully democratic for all practical intents and purposes, though I would reserve certain prerogatives to the crown… if the people want to do something as horrendous as the mass genocide of millions of innocent unborn babies for example they should not get their way. King Juan Carlos of Spain oversaw the institution of democracy and within his life time it led to modern secular ills such as abortion.
I realize I’m speaking idealistically… just musings.
 
Nobody but you claims it’s a ‘miracle cure,’ but it’s benefits are self evident in several hundred years of history among the OECD countries. Iraq is still getting their sea legs, they may be fine in another 20 yrs. Maybe they do need to split into smaller subdivisions for it to work for them.

The problem with kings is that one good one may be followed by 4-5 bad ones, and there is nothing much you can do about it.
 
There isn’t any problem with kings and queens in principle. But any person with such a deep seated hatred of monarchy probably feels the same way about papal succession.

Which grows tiresome in Christian debate, even for me. Opinions are opinions.

There have been plenty of great rulers. Perspective on their personal success and worth, is purely subjective. Not sure why people continue to insult people on their free opinions so readily here.
 
The problem with these so called “Catholic socialists” is that they confuse socialism with distributism.


I also believe a huge number of millennial Bernie Sanders supporters have socialism confused with distributism

A lot of so-called Catholic socialists will often reference Dorthy Day, but she was a communist BEFORE becoming Catholic. Afterwards, she realized the evils of both communism and socialism and became a distributionist.


Socialism is not the same as distrubutionism and is very similar to communism. The only real difference between communism and socialism is that communism is when socialists take complete control of the government.

In many ways, socialism is more selfish than communism, but both can be extremely totalitarian and both tend to be atheistic

 
Last edited:
misstherese said:
I think a monarchy is the best form of government, similar to the way the Catholic Church is set up.
Click to expand...
I came back to this because I’m flabbergasted by it.

If we’re talking about monarchies that are “similar to the way the Catholic Church is set up,” the Church is essentially an absolute monarchy (at least, the Vatican State is). Here are some of the other absolute monarchies existing today:

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Brunei, Qatar and, arguably, North Korea. All the other absolute monarchies have disappeared from the face of the earth (although I may have forgotten or been unaware of a few small and insignificant countries). Other monarchies are constitutional monarchies, with monarchs with extremely limited powers (if they have any at all), subordinate in almost every way (except for ceremonial functions) to their parliaments or other democratically elected bodies.

Are these really places you want to emulate?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top