What is Michael Voris' definition of socialism?

[Maxirad]

Does it jibe with this definition? Check out this video where John Corapi discusses socialism. Also check out what Dr. Richard Geraghty has had to say.

 

[Lancer]

Excerpts from the “benchmark” encyclical on Church’s condemnation of Socialism…as defined by the Church.

Pax Christi

**RERUM NOVARUM

ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
ON CAPITAL AND LABOR **

vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html

1. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man’s envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

5…**Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life. **…

14…The** socialists, therefore, in setting aside the parent and setting up a State supervision, act against natural justice, and destroy the structure of the home**.

1. And in addition to injustice, it is only too evident what an upset and disturbance there would be in all classes, and to how intolerable and hateful a slavery citizens would be subjected. The door would be thrown open to envy, to mutual invective, and to discord; the sources of wealth themselves would run dry, for no one would have any interest in exerting his talents or his industry; and that ideal equality about which they entertain pleasant dreams would be in reality the levelling down of all to a like condition of misery and degradation. Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods,must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal. The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property. This being established, we proceed to show where the remedy sought for must be found.

17…** Socialists may in that intent do their utmost, but all striving against nature is in vain. There naturally exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind; people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition**. Such unequality is far from being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community. Social and public life can only be maintained by means of various kinds of capacity for business and the playing of many parts; and each man, as a rule, chooses the part which suits his own peculiar domestic condition

 

[Maxirad]

Mr. Voris has basically said on more than one occasion that [certain North American politician] is a socialist.

 

[andrewstx]

It is true that the church has condemned communism amd socialism, which are two seperate but related systems.

But what is often not mentioned often here is that the church has also condemned laissez-fair capitialism as strongly.

 

[Maxirad]

Check out this review of Michael Moore’s 2009 documentary Capitalism: A Love Story.

 

[Maso]

I think that the RERUM NOVARUM ENCYCLICAL above defigns Communism, not Socialism.

Socialism, basically is beurocratic control of natural resources and that in the extreme can be extended ( get this…) human resources as well.

'Nuther words…

Obama and his socialists want to “nationalize” ( ie: socialize ) the oil industry. Maxine Waters told us so. Also the banking and the Auto industries. He has suceeded in doing that with the medical industry.

As for "Human Resourses’… and this is where it gets scary… the basic thrust of the brains behind the feminists and the homosexual movements is to systematically destroy the family to that end. Your great great grandchildren will be raised by “social engineers”, not families, unless Catholics get smart and stop voting for the Obamas and the Clintons and the Bidens and the Kennedys, the Pelosis and the Reids of the ding-bat Democratic party.