Which Political Philosophy?

[gmags2003]

Out of all of the political/economic philosophies, which ones do you find to be most in line with the Church’s teachings on social justice?

 

[teancum79]

Well I’m not Catholic, but I think the topic has merit.

Personally I think that capitalism is a wonderful economic system. It is a very poor moral system however. If it is balanced out by Christian ideas about helping the poor and things some restrictions are in place to prevent exploitation it can be stable provide growth and encourage people to work hard. The church would invite rather than have to government force people to give to the needy.

I think that system would be best, but very hard to do.

 

[Caesar517]

Well I’m not Catholic, but I think the topic has merit.

Personally I think that capitalism is a wonderful economic system. It is a very poor moral system however. If it is balanced out by Christian ideas about helping the poor and things some restrictions are in place to prevent exploitation it can be stable provide growth and encourage people to work hard. The church would invite rather than have to government force people to give to the needy.

I think that system would be best, but very hard to do.

I pretty much agree here. I think people who believe charity cannot care for the poor show a startling lack of faith in human compassion. I think the U.S. gives testament to the plausibility of capitalism.

 

[ribozyme]

I pretty much agree here. I think people who believe charity cannot care for the poor show a startling lack of faith in human compassion. I think the U.S. gives testament to the plausibility of capitalism.

Do you have any evidence that people will be extremely charitable? 1.7% of GDP does not impress me.

 

[Caesar517]

Do you have any evidence that people will be extremely charitable? 1.7% of GDP does not impress me.

The U.S. is the most economically free country ever. The U.S. is also the most charitable country ever. I have faith in people, especially when they are free to make their own choices.

 

[cynic]

The U.S. is the most economically free country ever. The U.S. is also the most charitable country ever. I have faith in people, especially when they are free to make their own choices.

so you’re willing to put education, the treatment of fatal illnesses in the hands chance because you have faith in people, and we do not. How do you argue with that.:doh2:

 

[Caesar517]

so you’re willing to put education, the treatment of fatal illnesses in the hands chance because you have faith in people, and we do not. How do you argue with that.:doh2:

Is it any more to chance than having big government deal with it?

I am very much in favor of privitizing the education system. The U.S. government had a chance to do it and they have failed.

 

[SoCalRC]

The U.S. is the most economically free country ever. The U.S. is also the most charitable country ever. I have faith in people, especially when they are free to make their own choices.

Actually, that is not really true. We control monetary policy and regulate most forms of capitalism. Lack of oversight is generally the culprit in massive systemic failures, like Enron’s collapse, the current mortgage crisis, the Savings and Loan fiasco, etc. If you want raw capitalism, look to say, Saipan during its boom. Slave labor and forced abortion, along with a booming sex trade…

In terms of total giving, we do top the list. Being the wealthiest nation in human history, this makes sense. But in terms of percentage of income or wealth, we are not the most charitable. In fact, it is the bottom of the US socioeconomic ladder that is most charitable by this measure. Perhaps that is why the Lord instructed us to be “poor in spirit” and why our priests take vows of poverty.

If one wants to know why some problems, particularly things like hunger and public health, require more than just private charity, I’d recommend reading what the priests and nuns who head up our most successful Catholic charity programs have to say. They should know, we provide the largest private social safety net in the country.

 

[cynic]

Is it any more to chance than having big government deal with it?

I am very much in favor of privitizing the education system. The U.S. government had a chance to do it and they have failed.

Big government can at least pay for some of it (…yes with your money) But of course children *are *responsible for how much or little their parents earn, and if the market doesn’t come to the party and provide the low cost education, then tough.

 

[mapleoak]

The U.S. government had a chance to do it and they have failed.

And the reason is that the governments only interest in charity is that to which extent it helps politicians earn brownie points for re-election. There is no moral conviction on the part of government to be charitable.

 

[mapleoak]

so you’re willing to put education, the treatment of fatal illnesses in the hands chance because you have faith in people, and we do not. How do you argue with that.:doh2:

Far from chance.

 

[jman507]

Typically quite a few political systems will work. Inherent to any political philosophy are certain advantages and disadvantages. Basically what needs to be there is some freedom, and a pathway to allow for care. What it comes down to is how the individual does. How one acts on an individual basis regarding oneself, one’s family, and one’s community is really a big concern with Catholicism.

In macroeconomic and political philosophies one needs to be very careful to make sure that those all the micro situations are allowed to work and are sustainable. That gets to be a rather complicated and complex venture. Chances are each philosophy will put certain aspects as higher priorities. There are certainly a lot of philosophies one could make an apology for, but it’ll most likely contain aspects that also can undermine social justice.

Then on top of that, we don’t live in a world of theories, we live in a world of applied theories. Theories may be drive the guidelines, but it will eventually become an eclectic mess due to other theories in competition, and just problems with trying to apply it. Once that happens the theories and applied theories will then more or less fall on a spectrum of apply good Catholic principles.

There is though a problem with putting in too much stock with the macro system, what is at the heart of Christianity it cannot be denied is oneself making that committed “yes” to the faith. From there we establish our love of God and neighbor. We cannot allow the macroeconomic and philosphical conditions put a hamper on that freedom to say “yes.”

 

[cynic]

And the reason is that the governments only interest in charity is that to which extent it helps politicians earn brownie points for re-election. There is no moral conviction on the part of government to be charitable.

How can you absolutely know that politicians think this way? Perhaps Christians will only give to score points for the after-life, and would rather throw a few coins at the guy in the street from their car window than help pay for schooling or healthcare (things that are apparently privileges,uneccessary). But then that would be an uncharitable assumption

 

[Cuddy_Duck]

mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=212

Neocon Catholic leaders nurtured by GOP and Conservative Philanthropy on their heels
Catholic voters migrated back to the Democrats in the 2006 midterm elections. Was it a temporary move or are they heading home for the long term?
In the 2004 presidential election cycle, Catholics, whose vote was considered open to both parties, were carefully courted by the Republicans. GOP organizers – accompanied by their neoconservative Catholic brethren – brought the “traditional family values” mantra to the table, highlighting supposed agreement between Catholics and conservative evangelical Christians on two major issues – abortion and same-sex marriage.

Michael Novak, a neoconservative author and philosopher who currently holds the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy, and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, Ralph McInerny, a University of Notre Dame Professor of medieval studies, Richard Neuhaus, the publisher of First Things (website), Deal Hudson, a Bush/Cheney liaison to Catholic voters, and others became indispensable allies.

Deal Hudson entered the scene in the mid-1990s. He left his academic career at Fordham University to become senior editor of Crisis in 1994 and editor the following year. He became the Republicans’ go-to-guy for all things Catholic.

Catholic-boating John Kerry
In 2004, John Kerry was not only “Swift Boated” over his military record, but he was “Catholic Boated” as well. GOP officials, and their Catholic neoconservative surrogates, continuously mocked and demeaned his religious beliefs.

In March 2004, George Neumayr, managing editor of the American Spectator, wrote that Kerry was “a more checkered Catholic” than John F. Kennedy. “Unlike Kennedy who had some residual sense of respect for the Church, Kerry uses his Catholicism as a campaign prop while sabotaging its teachings.”

So who here is part of this movement?

 

[Cuddy_Duck]

You can come out now.

 

[mapleoak]

How can you absolutely know that politicians think this way?

It is certainly not an absolute for politicians themselves, but moreso for government in general. There are indeed many politicians who hold personal charitable convictions.

Perhaps Christians will only give to score points for the after-life,

No, they give because it is commanded of them and they want to please God “As long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.” It is also of virtue to want to “score points” in addition to doing something just because it is pleasing to God.

and would rather throw a few coins at the guy in the street from their car window than help pay for schooling or healthcare (things that are apparently privileges,uneccessary).

Why would you think Christians are not willing to help those in need with schooling, housing, healthcare, food, money, etc., and only want to throw money from their car at people?

But then that would be an uncharitable assumption

I would think so.

 

[cynic]

No, they give because it is commanded of them and they want to please God.

Instead of just empathy. This affirms the original statement.

Why would you think Christians are not willing to help those in need with schooling, housing, healthcare, food, money, etc., and only want to throw money from their car at people?

Because it implies an ongoing obligation. It also puts the focus on a sort of worldy egalitarianism. Anathema to the right.

 

[mapleoak]

Instead of just empathy. This affirms the original statement.

Not excluding empathy. But man’s ultimate purpose is to be pleasing to God, therefore we do what is pleasing to God.

Because it implies an ongoing obligation. It also puts the focus on a sort of worldy egalitarianism. Anathema to the right.

Yes, there IS an ongoing obligation. It doesn’t have to be implied. And since Christians are willing to help those in need with schooling, housing, healthcare, food, money, etc., myself included, we are puting a focus on worldy egalitarianism? That is a new one to me.

 

[peary]

Out of all of the political/economic philosophies, which ones do you find to be most in line with the Church’s teachings on social justice?

Good article here on this matter:

catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=6155

 

[cynic]

Yes, there IS an ongoing obligation. It doesn’t have to be implied. And since Christians are willing to help those in need with schooling, housing, healthcare, food, money, etc., myself included, we are puting a focus on worldy egalitarianism? That is a new one to me.

Since the focus is on pleasing God, practical help aimed to level the playing field and provide opportunity may be seen as too ‘worldly’. I sense that attitude in more conservative Christians - this life doesn’t really matter, only the next. Since education is supposedly the responsibility of parents, and healthcare the responsibility of the individual, assistance with these things can be viewed as subversive.

Why should anyone care about literacy or chemotherapy for the poor anyway when all that matters is that God is glorified.