Why is socialism bad by Church teaching?

[Black_Rose]

In reviewing John XXIII’s encyclical Mater et Magistra, Father Robert Sirico observes that the Pontiff’s desire was to strengthen mediating institutions in order to protect the primacy of the human person. Far from advancing any form of collectivism, Pope John wanted to “multiply social relationships” so that the individual would be free to pursue the common good. Socialization does not mean centralization. Rather, it refers to the voluntary associations which Alexis de Tocqueville praised as being a vital part of American freedom in the 1830s.

The top-down, centralized planning of the Soviet system could not succeed because it contradicted the subsidiarity principle. When producers and consumers are not allowed to bargain freely, prices cease to reflect meaningful information and become arbitrary dictates of the bureaucracy.

cobdencentre.org/2010/04/catholic-social-conscience-talk-philip-booth/
By Toby Baxendale, on 14 April, 2010
“Regulatory bureaus tend to expand and acquire more powers. Those who enjoy exercising such powers are attracted to work in such institutions. The middle way is, then, inherently unstable. This is not a pessimistic view of human nature. It is just pointing out that when we criticise the concept of self interest in markets then we cannot assume the concept away when government is responsible for the allocation of economic resources. Just look at the budget situation of the US, Japan and almost every EU country. They are all, through the democratic process, piling burdens on future generations in order to finance today’s consumption encouraged by the self interest of voters and politicians.

“When the state acts it undermines the autonomy of individuals, families, businesses, charities, cooperatives, mutuals and professional and civil associations to act separately and in solidarity to meet the varied needs of families and the joint needs of the community in their own ways. We also frequently find that the result of government action is often precisely the opposite of that intended. If we do not like what we see in a market economy then our response should be to promote virtue, not big government.”

Irrelevant! You or your quotes do not explain how the welfare state leads to a loss of “human energies”. I do not see how the state necessarily undermines “individuals, families, businesses, charities, cooperatives, mutuals and professional and civil associations” but the state merely relieves them from most of their responsibility to provide material welfare for the unfortunate. Besides it is likely that the state is more effective than those groups since it has the power to tax and the bureaucratic machinery to efficiently process information and effectively act in a coordinated fashion. In contrast, the aggregate sum of private charity, notwithstanding that it is at most a meager 2% of GDP, are disparate reactionary deeds, many conducted with sincerity and others for self-recognition, with no teleological purpose since they merely the mitigate the symptoms of human material privation with little exception of actually solving systemic problems. Notable exceptions are organizations with access to plenty of funding, enabling them to be more broad in scope, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or George Soros’ the Open Society Institute.

 

[Abu]

Black_Rose
Besides it is likely that the state is more effective than those groups since it has the power to tax and the bureaucratic machinery to efficiently process information and effectively act in a coordinated fashion….the aggregate sum of private charity are disparate reactionary deeds with little exception of actually solving systemic problems. Notable exceptions are organizations with access to plenty of funding, enabling them to be more broad in scope, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or George Soros’ the Open Society Institute.

1. You obviously couldn’t care less for the development of free enterprise by the Late Catholic Scholastics which has enabled untold millions to participate in wealth creation and escape from dire poverty. You obviously couldn’t care less for the teaching of Christ’s Church on the value of free enterprise and the condemnation of socialism and the welfare state.
2. Your antipathy to the Church is further exemplified by your infatuation with the Gates & Soros efforts which revolve around promotion of abortion and contraception.
3. Your infatuation with the “power to tax” and “bureaucratic machinery” blinds you to the facts of rampant strangulation and inefficiency:
   blog.acton.org/archives/tag/welfare-state
   Culture and Economic Decline, John Couretas, June 28, 2010
   As they raise taxes, they create disincentives to the creation of wealth. The fact is, whenever you introduce force into society, you create disorder. The welfare state will never abolish society’s ills, because it creates others by its very nature. Notice also, that when the church was the pre-eminent agency for helping the poor, capitalism was in its infant stage. There simply was not a lot of wealth to go around to feed all the hungry mouths that were surviving instead of dying due to disease (also thanks to capitalism). The answer is to abolish the welfare state and unleash the creative engine of capitalism (constrained of course by the rule of contractual and property laws of course) and let people donate freely to the church and charity of their choice. It is abundantly clear that socialist style redistribution does not work. The state also undermines the moral teachings of the church as it usurps its influence.

thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/06/1388
**Fatal Attraction: Democracy and the Welfare State by Samuel Gregg
June 18, 2010 **
Expansive and expensive welfare programs have brought European social democracies to the verge of catastrophe. Now the dynamics of democracy may be an impediment to economic reform.
A week, it is often said, is a long time in politics. Much, however, can change in a year. Only a short while ago some European politicians were touting the European social model’s superiority over what many continental Europeans deride as “Anglo-Saxon capitalism.” Now, however, governments across Europe are scrambling to avoid the fate of Greece. Moreover, they are doing so by contemplating—and, in some cases, implementing—the hitherto unthinkable: reducing their budget deficits by diminishing the expansive welfare states to which many Europeans have long been accustomed.

In doing so, these governments are finally acknowledging a truth initially obscured by the crisis of the euro: that for all the disarray generated by the euro’s recent tribulations, Europe’s economic woes have more systematic causes.

One cause is several decades of low economic growth. As the Czech president Václav Klaus recently observed, “average annual economic growth in the eurozone countries was 3.4 percent in the 1970s, 2.4 percent in the 1980s, 2.2 percent in the 1990s and only 1.1 percent from 2001 to 2009.” “A similar slowdown,” Klaus added, “has not occurred anywhere else in the world.”

 

[Black_Rose]

1. You obviously couldn’t care less for the development of free enterprise by the Late Catholic Scholastics which has enabled untold millions to participate in wealth creation and escape from dire poverty. You obviously couldn’t care less for the teaching of Christ’s Church on the value of free enterprise and the condemnation of socialism and the welfare state.
2. Your antipathy to the Church is further exemplified by your infatuation with the Gates & Soros efforts which revolve around promotion of abortion and contraception.
3. Your infatuation with the “power to tax” and “bureaucratic machinery” blinds you to the facts of rampant strangulation and inefficiency:
   blog.acton.org/archives/tag/welfare-state
   Culture and Economic Decline, John Couretas, June 28, 2010
   As they raise taxes, they create disincentives to the creation of wealth. The fact is, whenever you introduce force into society, you create disorder. The welfare state will never abolish society’s ills, because it creates others by its very nature. Notice also, that when the church was the pre-eminent agency for helping the poor, capitalism was in its infant stage. There simply was not a lot of wealth to go around to feed all the hungry mouths that were surviving instead of dying due to disease (also thanks to capitalism). The answer is to abolish the welfare state and unleash the creative engine of capitalism (constrained of course by the rule of contractual and property laws of course) and let people donate freely to the church and charity of their choice. It is abundantly clear that socialist style redistribution does not work. The state also undermines the moral teachings of the church as it usurps its influence.

thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/06/1388
**Fatal Attraction: Democracy and the Welfare State by Samuel Gregg
June 18, 2010 **
Expansive and expensive welfare programs have brought European social democracies to the verge of catastrophe. Now the dynamics of democracy may be an impediment to economic reform.
A week, it is often said, is a long time in politics. Much, however, can change in a year. Only a short while ago some European politicians were touting the European social model’s superiority over what many continental Europeans deride as “Anglo-Saxon capitalism.” Now, however, governments across Europe are scrambling to avoid the fate of Greece. Moreover, they are doing so by contemplating—and, in some cases, implementing—the hitherto unthinkable: reducing their budget deficits by diminishing the expansive welfare states to which many Europeans have long been accustomed.

In doing so, these governments are finally acknowledging a truth initially obscured by the crisis of the euro: that for all the disarray generated by the euro’s recent tribulations, Europe’s economic woes have more systematic causes.

One cause is several decades of low economic growth. As the Czech president Václav Klaus recently observed, “average annual economic growth in the eurozone countries was 3.4 percent in the 1970s, 2.4 percent in the 1980s, 2.2 percent in the 1990s and only 1.1 percent from 2001 to 2009.” “A similar slowdown,” Klaus added, “has not occurred anywhere else in the world.”

Here’s a hint:

It seems like most of your posts are just copying and pasting assertions, devoid of any substance, from obviously right-wing websites. Try to copy and paste from someone such as Henry CK Liu who often includes detailed elaboration of history in his writings. For example, this has many historical examples and detailed elaborates of the perspectives of well-known economic thinkers.

Provide historical examples of the inefficiency of welfare states or even specific government programs. Try to imitate Liu style (very hard but try) instead of just copying and pasting right-wing rants from the Acton Institute.

 

[Black_Rose]

Correction:

In contrast, the aggregate sum of private charity, notwithstanding that it is at most a meager 2% of GDP, are disparate reactionary deeds, many conducted with sincerity and others for self-recognition, with no overall teleological purpose since they merely mitigate the symptoms of human material privation, myopically conducted with no intention of actually solving or addressing systemic problems.

 

[ERose]

This whole attitude of Americans here reminds me of an Admiral King in the U.S. navy during WWII.
He would not adopt the Canadian form of protection for ships during the Battle of the Atlantic.
He would send out ships by themselves and they would be sunk, while at the same time the Canadians were sending convoys down to South America through the same area to pick up crude oil to be refined in Canada and not losing any ships, but because King would not adopt the convoy system he lost 24 American ships in 4 months with over 2 million tons of shipping lost. This all happened off the coast of the USA. Just plain stupid and stubborn. Finally Winston Churchill convinced him to smarten up, while Eisenhower was heard to comment, “if somebody would shoot King we could shorten the war”
Here was a man who refused to think beyond his own old ideas and it cost dearly.

Were you two related? I see many of the same qualities in you two.

 

[Monk21]

Were you two related? I see many of the same qualities in you two.

Well some peoples paradigms just don’t shift and they keep doing the same thing over and over again and wonder why their world is somewhat behind everyone else.

37 and standing still ! The possibilities of your country are so great, yet I see just in fighting and you are getting nowhere. And it is not Obama’s fault.​

 

[Abu]

It’s no surprise that those who have no use for democracy or free enterprise, can’t factually show any benefits in their imagined socialist paradises. Apart from some who know nothing about economics, or about economic history, there are those who also know nothing about those many countries steeped in graft and corruption, and often warring tribes and revolution, and which have profited little from the massive aid provided from free enterprise societies, and the great advances of great men like Norman Borlaug who actually lived among them and showed them how to benefit from his genetically modified green revolution.

He is one of just six people to win the Nobel Peace Prize, the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. And yet Dr. Borlaug, who died September, 2009, is scarcely known even in his own country, the U.S.A.

Václav Klaus, as President of the Czech Republic and an economist, has identified the disastrous welfare state blunders in Europe (post #402).

It is typical that those who trash the Catholic Church and the Catholic free enterprise system have no idea what works and what doesn’t work, and lamely wallow in prejudices.

 

[Black_Rose]

It’s no surprise that those who have no use for democracy or free enterprise, can’t factually show any benefits in their imagined socialist paradises. Apart from some who know nothing about economics, or about economic history, there are those who also know nothing about those many countries steeped in graft and corruption, and often warring tribes and revolution, and which have profited little from the massive aid provided from free enterprise societies, and the great advances of great men like Norman Borlaug who actually lived among them and showed them how to benefit from his genetically modified green revolution.

I don’t know what exactly is a “socialist paradise” but countries such as Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Germany have extensive social welfare systems and are in a better fiscal state that the United States. (Germany does indeed has a higher public debt burden than the US, but creditors are confident in its ability to repay its debt, reflected by the low interest rates in its ten year sovereign debt, about thirty basis point lower than 10 year Treasuries. But perhaps this might reflect dismal macroeconomic fundamentals throughout the Eurozone and their general passive acceptance of deflation due to their cultural aversion to inflation instead of a superior credit rating.) Well, one real benefit of most European welfare states is that their citizens work less hours per year than people working in the United States.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/05/about-that-mediterranean-work-ethic.html

So have you read Liu’s link that I proffered? I doubt he is ignorant concerning economics or economic history.

He is one of just six people to win the Nobel Peace Prize, the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. And yet Dr. Borlaug, who died September, 2009, is scarcely known even in his own country, the U.S.A.

BTW, there is no such thing as the “Congressional Gold Medal of Honor”. He did won the “Congressional Gold Medal”, not to be confused with the highest American military decoration, the “Medal of Honor” (not “*Congressional *Medal of Honor”, just “Medal of Honor”).

I don’t know what that is suppose to mean. Perhaps that people in general do not care or have short memories. I wouldn’t be surprised if most casual baseball fans (or you) do not know who, for example, is Tom Seaver, Steve Carlton, or Roger Hornsby. I don’t remember every Nobel Prize winner and baseball fans do not remember every Gold Glove, Silver Slugger or Cy Young winner, and I do not expect others to do the same.

But you do indeed have a point that Norman Bourlag achieves are indeed underappreciated by most people. I do not see how Bourlag’s work and accomplishments support a right-wing interpretation of history and economics.

 

[ERose]

To all those who think that your services like Fire, Police etc are not a form of socialistic action Please tell me how you arrive at this?
!. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for the police, fire, etc.
3. The whole community is protected.
Now

1. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for medical needs.
3. The whole community is covered.
   Please explain how one is socialistic and the other is not?

Monk,

I know you are smarter than this from your previous posts. What is the definition of Socialism, Monk? It is state control over industry and capital.

The police force is not a industry. It is not there to make a profit. It is there to uphold the laws of the community that are established by that community’s governing body. Thus the police force is a governmental institution.

The hospital/clinic system on the other hand are true industries in the since that they exist to provide a service to the community just like the police force but they also exist to generate a profit. Granted a government can take over an industry which was for the most part done in your country concerning healthcare, but it is a industry that can be easily performed by private companies where this cannot be done with a police force.

I know you know this Monk. I am just curious what you are attempting here.

 

[ERose]

Every time Social Security has had to be tweaked over the 75 yrs of its existence, it has been and it has flourished. It will be adjusted again and will continue to be the favorite program in the history of the country. Same with Medicare and Medicaid. The American people will not, however, permit the return of the stupid Bush doughnut hole.

Flourished? Ask the people that are on it. Social Security barely pays the bills. That is the reason why you see so many senior citizens going back to work or doing something to subsidize their income. Why is this the case? Because our government sometime in the past decided to borrow money from the social security system which was never suppose to happen. You are correct it is going to have to be tweaked because it is going into bankruptcy because it has been mismanaged by our government. This is the reason why most financial advisors tell you not to depend upon it being there.

Health care is not NECESSARY??? how can a kid get to school if he is not healthy?

You misquote me here. It is not a NECESSARY government function, because this industry can be managed more effectively by private businesses and normally are.

How come the huge majority of those at the most selective universities, Yale, Harvard, et al, come from public schools? They are the top high school graduates. From my experience at Yale graduate schools, most students came from public schools.

Again, you misquote. Never said that public schools do not generate kids that can go to Harvard or whereever. I said that across the board private schools outperform public schools, in dropout rates, assessment scores and ACT/SAT scores. Look it up. This data is on the internet.

In many areas the public hospitals are the superior institutions. Of course the so called private hospitals are subsidized by government funding so exactly how “private” are they? They could not exist with government money. Do you mind that your “private” hospital relies on public funds, my tax dollars???

Again that can be questioned. Granted there are not alot of statistics out there because they are not kept, but most experts will tell you that private hospitals outperform public hospitals in most areas, because they are dependent upon the customer paying to survive compared to public hospitals who are dependent on the government pay to survive. So private hospitals are more customer oriented than public.

Concerning the tax dollars you are talking about above that is called Medicare/Medicaid. Do you want private hospitals to turn down Medicare/Medicaid insured people? That is being a little harsh for one that wants to believe they care for others isn’t?

Vezelay, you really need to research what socialism really is. You do not show that you have a good understanding of the concept. I am not trying to say this to hurt your feelings, I just recommending to you to become informed.

 

[Black_Rose]

Monk,

I know you are smarter than this from your previous posts. What is the definition of Socialism, Monk? It is state control over industry and capital.

The police force is not a industry. It is not there to make a profit. It is there to uphold the laws of the community that are established by that community’s governing body. Thus the police force is a governmental institution.

The hospital/clinic system on the other hand are true industries in the since that they exist to provide a service to the community just like the police force but they also exist to generate a profit. Granted a government can take over an industry which was for the most part done in your country concerning healthcare, but it is a industry that can be easily performed by private companies where this cannot be done with a police force.

I know you know this Monk. I am just curious what you are attempting here.

Radical libertarians could easily imagine the fire and police force operating as privatized for-profit agencies that supposedly operate more efficiently that government agencies.

Well, regarding your supposedly “knowledge” of history, could you provide evidence for this:

So the church did not have any impact whatsoever on the history of the Europe? Why don’t you just imagine what modern times would be like without the Church? Lets see before the Church there was what polytheism which promoted a worldview that gods ran everything. The sun was a god’s chariot that ran daily across the sky. The heavens was a dome and above those heavens the gods lived. The earth quaked because of some god. Lightning was either Zeus or Thor attacking something one or below the earth. Not a very good world view to develop science don’t you think. Women where property with no rights whatsoever outside her husband. The only purpose of a woman was to produce babies and her worth was dependant on he accomplishing that. Would barbarians still be running rampant thoughout Europe you think, since the Church wouldn’t have been there to convert them to Christianity? Would there have been significant developments in medicine over the time to the level it is today you think? If so how would that have happened? Witchdoctors came together and developed hospitals? Would that have happened? You wouldn’t have had Orders of monks and nuns creating the hospital system if there was not Christianity. I could go on and on about this.

Could you provide evidence, primary and secondary, for your ridiculous caricature of the non-Christian philosophies of Late Antiquity, such as Stoicism and Neoplatonism, actually believe this? There is an depiction of Sol Invictus, the unconquered sun on Roman coins of the Emperor Probis riding around on a quadriga. But he was depicted doing other things, on other coins, and many others were also depicted on riding on chariots. There is little to indicate that people, especially the educated, actually believed that the sun was a god riding his chariot in the sky.

 

[Monk21]

Monk,

I know you are smarter than this from your previous posts. What is the definition of Socialism, Monk? It is state control over industry and capital.

The police force is not a industry. It is not there to make a profit. It is there to uphold the laws of the community that are established by that community’s governing body. Thus the police force is a governmental institution.

The hospital/clinic system on the other hand are true industries in the since that they exist to provide a service to the community just like the police force but they also exist to generate a profit. Granted a government can take over an industry which was for the most part done in your country concerning healthcare, but it is a industry that can be easily performed by private companies where this cannot be done with a police force.

I know you know this Monk. I am just curious what you are attempting here.

So what you are saying is not what is actually happening, but what you call it.
WOW,
No there can be private security companies that look after the protection of the people, but it is much more efficient and safer to have the gov. look after it. The same goes for the fire depts.
Can’t you see how you stretch things to make them slant your way???

 

[ERose]

Radical libertarians could easily imagine the fire and police force operating as privatized for-profit agencies that supposedly operate more efficiently that government agencies. .

I am not libertarian.

Well, regarding your supposedly “knowledge” of history, could you provide evidence for this:
Could you provide evidence, primary and secondary, for your ridiculous caricature of the non-Christian philosophies of Late Antiquity, such as Stoicism and Neoplatonism, actually believe this? There is an depiction of Sol Invictus, the unconquered sun on Roman coins of the Emperor Probis riding around on a quadriga. But he was depicted doing other things, on other coins, and many others were also depicted on riding on chariots. There is little to indicate that people, especially the educated, actually believed that the sun was a god riding his chariot in the sky.

You are joking right? Did you read or learn about classical mythology? It is all over the internet surely. But here you go:

unrv.com/culture/mythology.php that is the first one that popped up for Roman mythology.

religionfacts.com/greco-roman/overview.htm for Greek mythology.

You can find others for Egyptian, Norse, Celtic, etc. Are you loosing your edge or are you just becoming more argumentative?

 

[ERose]

So what you are saying is not what is actually happening, but what you call it.
WOW,
No there can be private security companies that look after the protection of the people, but it is much more efficient and safer to have the gov. look after it. The same goes for the fire depts.
Can’t you see how you stretch things to make them slant your way???

I’m slanting Monk? Come on now. Go back and read your posts yourself. God read the definition of Socialism yourself. Don’t tell me you are loosing your edge too? I really have loved our debate to be honest. I have learned a great deal from you and Black Rose particularly because you have forced me to not assume and I thank you. So hopefully we can keep this up.

Maybe the next time up in Canada we can meet up and have lunch (on me). That is if I am close enough to where you live that is.

 

[Black_Rose]

You are joking right? Did you read or learn about classical mythology? It is all over the internet surely. But here you go:

unrv.com/culture/mythology.php that is the first one that popped up for Roman mythology.

religionfacts.com/greco-roman/overview.htm for Greek mythology.

You can find others for Egyptian, Norse, Celtic, etc. Are you loosing your edge or are you just becoming more argumentative?

No, I asked the question whether a majority of the pagan educated people during the Roman Empire and Late Antiquity (gee, you are very bad at noticing periodizations) actually believed that the gods controlled everything.

For example:

In the Platonic tradition before Porphyry,** Plutarch and Plotinus already interpreted classical Greek mythology as philosophical allegories **(the Stoics were first to establish this practice). Porphyry, however, takes this much further than his Platonic predecessors and does it more systematically. This is revealed e.g., in his attitude towards Homer, whose texts he takes to have a hidden, philosophical meaning behind the literal one (see The Cave of the Nymphs). He also was the first Platonist to comment on the Chaldean Oracles, a pagan religious text in verse compiled in the 2nd century AD that the later Neoplatonists took for a divine revelation. It is a characteristic of post-Iamblichean Neoplatonism (330 AD onwards) that religion, religious rites and even magic (theurgy) were taken to be an alternative way to the soul’s salvation, beside philosophy. Porphyry did not share this view. He did not reject magic outright, but he seems to have restricted its efficacy to the sphere of nature and not to have regarded it as a means to establish contact with the intelligible realm as philosophy could do. His interpretation and concerns with religious matters, however, opened for the developments undertaken by Iamblichus and the subsequent tradition of pagan Neoplatonism.

plato.stanford.edu/entries/porphyry/#3.1

In accord with this ontology, the Stoics, like the Epicureans, make God material. But while the Epicureans think the gods are too busy being blessed and happy to be bothered with the governance of the universe (Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus 123–4), the Stoic God is immanent throughout the whole of creation and directs its development down to the smallest detail. God is identical with one of the two ungenerated and indestructible first principles (archai) of the universe. One principle is matter which they regard as utterly unqualified and inert. It is that which is acted upon. God is identified with an eternal reason (logos, Diog. Laert. 44B ) or intelligent designing fire (Aetius, 46A) which structures matter in accordance with Its plan. This plan is enacted time and time again, beginning from a state in which all is fire, through the generation of the elements, to the creation of the world we are familiar with, and eventually back to fire in a cycle of endless recurrence. The designing fire of the conflagration is likened to a sperm which contains the principles or stories of all the things which will subsequently develop (Aristocles in Eusebius, 46G). Under this guise, God is also called ‘fate.’ It is important to realise that the Stoic God does not craft its world in accordance with its plan from the outside, as the demiurge in Plato’s Timaeus is described as doing. Rather, the history of the universe is determined by God’s activity internal to it, shaping it with its differentiated characteristics. The biological conception of God as a kind of living heat or seed from which things grow seems to be fully intended. The further identification of God with pneuma or breath may have its origins in medical theories of the Hellenistic period. See Baltzly (2003).

plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/

So the Stoics do not believe in a pantheon of anthropomorphic deities capriciously running the affairs of the world, instead their theology seems to be more pantheistic. (I mistakenly said that it was a “Late Antiquity” philosophy, but it becomes insignificant after the second century.) There is plenty of evidence that the masses did believe in a pantheon of pagan gods and celebrates their festivals, but your remarks fail to appreciate the spectrum of philosophical thought throughout the Roman Empire.

 

[RonGawthorp]

Originally Posted by Monk21
To all those who think that your services like Fire, Police etc are not a form of socialistic action Please tell me how you arrive at this?
!. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for the police, fire, etc.
3. The whole community is protected.
Now

1. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for medical needs.
3. The whole community is covered.
   Please explain how one is socialistic and the other is not?

I’m not a libertarian. But I’m not a Socialist also. Monk… the Church as come out strongly against Socialism. You obviously have not. Therefore I’ve concluded that you are at odds with the authority of the Church.

In this case, you have one authority and I have another. I happen to believe my authority trumps your authority (whatever that is). We’ve seen what Socialism has done in the past, being responsible for the deaths of countless people. I guess the only other proof for you will be face to face with our Lord.

 

[ERose]

No, I asked the question whether a majority of the pagan educated people during the Roman Empire and Late Antiquity (gee, you are very bad at noticing periodizations) actually believed that the gods controlled everything.

For example:

plato.stanford.edu/entries/porphyry/#3.1

plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/

So the Stoics do not believe in a pantheon of anthropomorphic deities capriciously running the affairs of the world, instead their theology seems to be more pantheistic. (I mistakenly said that it was a “Late Antiquity” philosophy, but it becomes insignificant after the second century.) There is plenty of evidence that the masses did believe in a pantheon of pagan gods and celebrates their festivals, but your remarks fail to appreciate the spectrum of philosophical thought throughout the Roman Empire.

I am sorry you are right I must not have completely read you comment and jumped the gun I should say.

As you pointed, the far majority of citizens in the Roman Empire were polytheistic in their Faith. It is not true that all Romans were Stoics or all Romans were NeoPlatonist either.

I never said that there was only one train of thought in the Roman Empire. Granted this is most probably not the place for it but why don’t you explain how the world views of the Stoics and/or Neo-Platonist would have resulted into the Scientific revolution?

 

[Monk21]

Originally Posted by Monk21
To all those who think that your services like Fire, Police etc are not a form of socialistic action Please tell me how you arrive at this?
!. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for the police, fire, etc.
3. The whole community is protected.
Now

1. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for medical needs.
3. The whole community is covered.
   Please explain how one is socialistic and the other is not?

I’m not a libertarian. But I’m not a Socialist also. Monk… the Church as come out strongly against Socialism. You obviously have not. Therefore I’ve concluded that you are at odds with the authority of the Church.

In this case, you have one authority and I have another. I happen to believe my authority trumps your authority (whatever that is). We’ve seen what Socialism has done in the past, being responsible for the deaths of countless people. I guess the only other proof for you will be face to face with our Lord.

Why do people always take the worst possible thoughts when discussing the pros and cons of this or that.
Tell me when and where here in Canada there have been deaths of countless people because we have some socialistic programs such as Fire, Police, schools and medical looked after by the government.
What you are talking abt is communism and usually with dictators running the show. You go from one extreme to another.
I am not at odds with the church and you have no right to judge me on that.
I have never talked of total socialism, I have argued for socialistic programs that help the people as a whole particulary medicine.
What Pope has called this a matter of faith or dogma?

 

[Monk21]

Originally Posted by Monk21
To all those who think that your services like Fire, Police etc are not a form of socialistic action Please tell me how you arrive at this?
!. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for the police, fire, etc.
3. The whole community is protected.
Now

1. You pay your taxes.
2. A portion of your taxes go to pay for medical needs.
3. The whole community is covered.
   Please explain how one is socialistic and the other is not?

I’m not a libertarian. But I’m not a Socialist also. Monk… the Church as come out strongly against Socialism. You obviously have not. Therefore I’ve concluded that you are at odds with the authority of the Church.

In this case, you have one authority and I have another. I happen to believe my authority trumps your authority (whatever that is). We’ve seen what Socialism has done in the past, being responsible for the deaths of countless people. I guess the only other proof for you will be face to face with our Lord.

You still did not explain the difference in my question.

 

[Monk21]

Monk,

I know you are smarter than this from your previous posts. What is the definition of Socialism, Monk? It is state control over industry and capital.

The police force is not a industry. It is not there to make a profit. It is there to uphold the laws of the community that are established by that community’s governing body. Thus the police force is a governmental institution.

The hospital/clinic system on the other hand are true industries in the since that they exist to provide a service to the community just like the police force but they also exist to generate a profit. Granted a government can take over an industry which was for the most part done in your country concerning healthcare, but it is a industry that can be easily performed by private companies where this cannot be done with a police force.

I know you know this Monk. I am just curious what you are attempting here.

Now in the documentory “Sicko” you heard the tapes of Nixon and Holderman (?) talking abt insurance coverage for health care to make a profit and Nixon became quite excited abt the prospect. He said, “I like the profit idea”. This was the start of insurance companies denying claims and reducing medical care in the states. So you can make it an industry or you can make it a service like the Police and fire dept. Call it one thing and gee everything changes.