What is more Christian -socialism or Capitalism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rozellelily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JanSobieskiIII said:
led to people starving (see Venezuela as a recent example).
Click to expand...
Venezuela used to be the most prosperous nation in Latin America, with its huge petroleum reserves. Now its a basket case due to extreme socialism.

Ditto, BTW, with Cuba who was almost 1st World at the time of the Castro insurrection
 
AlbMagno said:
And I’m not saying communism hasn’t done equal evil
Click to expand...
“Equal evil?!” Communism is the most bloody ideology known to man! Stalin killed 66 million of his own people! Mao killed millions of Chinese. People constantly mention Hitler but he was a saint compared to those evil communist bastards. Thank God America fought the Reds and won the Cold War. Communism would have destroyed humanity. And it is to the Church’s abiding shame that communism wasn’t condemned at Vatican II. But St John Paul II stood up to the satanic communists and helped bring it down.
 
I just got back from Argentina which at one point in the early 20th century was the 4th wealthiest country in the world.

After their socialist spat they’re on par with the rest of South America. It’s a lesson we never seem to learn.
 
Traditionally a lot of socialist countries past and present either had or are trying to supplant God as the center of our universe with the state. In the past you could look at the USSR and other Soviet block states. China still does to some degree trying to control the Catholic Church. Obviously those are the extreme end of socialism and that is communism, I think. In Europe and more recently in north America relativism has been having more of an impact. That is my understanding of the two systems as far as religion goes.

Capitalism is a good system, if not taken to the extreme, it does not try to supplant God. Conservatives, whom are traditionally capitalist, tend to give more to charitable organizations because they see it as a personal responsibility and not that of the state, while our liberals tend to see it more of a responsibility of the state through taxation.

So I guess it comes down to your personal beliefs on how to take care of our brothers and sisters in need. I personally support the capitalist system. I am right of center. That being said I don’t have any issues with my taxes going to help the needy. I will still donate my time and finances. Again I think the capitalist system is probably closest as far as profits are not at the expense of people lives.

Just my opinion on it all and yours may very 😉
 
Last edited:
I’m from Argentina, yes, in the 1900s the country was at its best in wealth, but all the money was concentrated in a landowner’s oligarchy. Later Argentina went through many proccesses that empoverted it, including numerous neoliberal dictatorship implanted by the US-Freemasonry through “Operación Condor”
 
The money is still concentrated at the top though, the only difference now is who the top is. Now it’s politicians labor union leaders.
 
I agree, but with this statement you aknowledge that Argentina wasn’t perfect in the agro-capitalism of early 20th Century, and if it isn’t perfect now it is not solely because of socialdemocratic goverments (we never had a true marxist-socialist goverment)
 
Try to find EWTN’s five-part miniseries on Christian Social Order. I watched it last year and it was absolutely fantastic. The Benedictine priest who led the program spoke about family, law, economics, etc. in the context of Christian Social Order. Regarding economics, he spoke to the dichotomy between capitalism and socialism and the Church. He explains it well, and I honestly cannot remember enough to summarize it myself. So, try to find the series, even if you have to buy it from EWTN Religious Catalogue. It’s worth it!

May God bless you all! 🙂
 
I am in full agreement, but whenever the populists get in control they make grand promises and lots of expenses and do great harm to the economy.

It certainly wasn’t perfect in the 1900s, but it wasn’t perfect in the US during that time frame either, and still isn’t perfect now, but it’s unarguably better economically.

BTW, I do absolutely love your country. I was duck hunting in between Rosario and Santa Fe, beautiful doesn’t begin to describe it.
 
(Off topic) Thanks! Yes, Argentina is beautiful with all its variety in climate. You said you were near Rosario, have you visited Our Lady of Rosario (Nuestra Señora del Rosario) basillica? It’s in a town named San Nicolas, not far from Rosario. I went to a retreat there 2 weeks ago and it’s amazing!! Also, the National Youth Day was in Rosario nearly 1 month ago
 
Socialism as run by governments is always a direct violation of the 10th Commandment.

Thou shalt not covet … lots of coveting going on with socialism. The have-nots consistently vote to force redistribution from those who have. On the basis that the “haves” have too much and the have-nots are entitled to as much as they can extract.

Not talking about tithing anymore, not when the tithe was usually taken to be 10% and effective tax rates in many socialist countries can exceed 60%.

Now capitalism. There’s coveting going on there as well, but transactions are voluntary as opposed to required. It certainly has its own issues, but there is also more freedom of action as opposed to socialism.
 
My honest opinion on this is that it’s like saying “Which is more Christian, blue cars or red cars?”

They are two different systems for managing resources and their distribution to the people. Both can be beneficial, and both can be harmful. The only way for either system to be truly Christian is to have Christ at the center of it.
 
Saxum said:
40.png
AlbMagno:
Then the problem isn’t the Healthcare System itself, but its pro-abortion and pro-contraception politics, things that can be changed while still maintaining Public Healthcare.
Click to expand...
I agree. But I still oppose public healthcare because it always involves some kind of rationing. This means that deserving people are denied access to healthcare when they need it or are forced to wait a long time. When you pay for healthcare yourself, you receive the best possible service.

In any public healthcare system, the government will make decisions about how your money is spent. I resent having to pay tax funds to provide abortions to promiscuous teenagers, gender reassignments to confused men, and methodone for heroin addicts.

Anybody who thinks healthcare is great should read about the poor baby, Charlie Gard. The government of the UK even refused to allow the Pope to provide healthcare for this child. Disgraceful.
Click to expand...
True. When you pay for it yourself only the poor people miss out.
 
Alex337 said:
True. When you pay for it yourself only the poor people miss out.
Click to expand...
The poor people don’t miss out because there is always a safety net for them. The only people who miss out are the mentally deranged who want gender reassignments and the immoral who want abortions. I resent having to pay for the sins of others. Public health forces me to participate in sins.
 
God forbid that people should have to take responsibility for themselves and pay insurance.
 
Saxum said:
40.png
Alex337:
True. When you pay for it yourself only the poor people miss out.
Click to expand...
The poor people don’t miss out because there is always a safety net for them. The only people who miss out are the mentally deranged who want gender reassignments and the immoral who want abortions. I resent having to pay for the sins of others. Public health forces me to participate in sins.
Click to expand...
We’ve all seen how many people miss out when you are forced to pay for your own medical treatment. Not everyone can afford those kinds of prices. I’ve seen US medical bills; without insurance they wouldn’t be viable for many people I know. And many I know also wouldn’t be able to afford that insurance.

There’s a reason one of the most popular shows of the decade is about a teacher who, when he finds out he has cancer, goes on a wild criminal adventure in order to fund his own treatment. That story would be very short in Aus.
 
Saxum said:
God forbid that people should have to take responsibility for themselves and pay insurance.
Click to expand...
Some folks can’t. And a lot of the time it’s people with disabilities or bad health who can’t work, and without work they rely on benefits (I don’t know your opinion on those). And benefits aren’t enough to go around to things like insurance, especially when you’re already covering special needs materials that the government doesn’t provide.
 
Yes, it removes those jobs, but creates others.

At the turn of the 20th century, most people worked in some form of agriculture. Now, almost no one does, yet we produce more food than ever, and have a much larger population and roughly comparable unemployment rates.

You should read economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt. It’s a good primer.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
Yes, it removes those jobs, but creates others.

At the turn of the 20th century, most people worked in some form of agriculture. Now, almost no one does, yet we produce more food than ever, and have a much larger population and roughly comparable unemployment rates.

You should read economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt. It’s a good primer.
Click to expand...
It creates fewer. The whole point of automating is that by doing so there is less work that needs to be done by humans. And certainly less unskilled labour which is what impacts those communities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top