Like you, I see the futility of fighting it. Unfortunately (for me), my resignation to the reality of things came at the expense of several years of trying to decipher the system from top to bottom. I believe I have a very good grasp on certain aspects of it.
I could go into agonizing detail of how titles are transferred, and about how money is created (and destroyed), and how those things affect our way of life in a legal sense, but it would not change the basic reality of it all: that even though there are remedies built into the system that could unleash brotherly love throughout society in ways never before seen in the world, they are very well hidden in the laws, and guarded by the most formidable enemy of all, the love of money.
So to boil it all down to the way I see it, distributism is a viable economic model, but it would require that people enjoy full private property rights again, and most probably the willingness to endure a lower standard of living for at least a generation or two.
I think you are exactly correct in saying distributism requires a willingness to endure a lower standard of living for a generation or two. Possibly we agree on why that’s so, and possibly we don’t. I don’t know. But let’s explore it.
While there are certainly exceptions, I believe that generally speaking the individual and family acquisition of productive, inheritable assets is a multigenerational project. Each generation builds on the accomplishments of the last one in terms of assets, education and the self-discipline to “do without”. If each generation serves itself with as much consumption as it can (usually barely) afford, the next generation is impoverished to a degree in all of those things.
Why is it important? Well, for the very reasons the Popes have given. Even a smallish degree of independence in resources frees a person and a family; in terms of time together, joint pursuits, and perhaps most importantly in terms of having the freedom of mind to pursue the teachings of one’s faith. If we’re overly wedded to consuming, we automatically become overly wedded to the means of income and therefore the culture and mores of the employment we have. We tend to adopt the corporate culture which might, on its own, not be so bad, but which cannot be the center of our lives and thinking. On the other hand, if we look to government for our sustenance and benefits, we tend to adopt its mores and culture. Either way, we become slaves to an organization that does not have our ultimate goal (salvation) in mind whatever. It’s a sort of mild version of Stockholm Syndrome. We begin to think like our captors precisely because we’re captives.
Among the ways one can look at money, however, is that it’s “time in a capsule”. When I work on something and am paid for it, the pay represents hours or days of my life. It’s what I spent my life doing for some period of the short time I have on this earth. So, should I respect it or disdain it? In my mind, it’s to be respected, just as one should respect the time he is given on this earth. But it is not to be made an idol. We are commanded to have no strange gods before God. Not money, nor time. Both are creatures.
And so, if by working we convert the time we have on this earth to the betterment of the life of another, we have spent it well, even though it’s indirect. Is there a difference between working in a soup kitchen for X hours and donating the amount of money I would make in the same number of hours? There can be, but not if I properly understand what money is and if I properly understand why I am putting in the hours while I am putting them in. Chances are I’m much more efficient at what I ordinarily do for a living than I would be in putting food on plates in a soup kitchen.
But then, in the kitchen we actually have contact with the people, don’t we? We give them something they could not have for themselves through their own efforts or they wouldn’t be there. We know something of their lives; perhaps gain some understanding of them. If they’re poor and ragged, perhaps it’s easier for us to see the Face of Christ in them. But when I work at what I do, I’m actually doing the same thing. I’m doing for someone that which they have not the talent or training to do for themselves. If that was not so, they wouldn’t be willing to pay me to do it. It’s harder, I’ll grant, to see that I’m relieving them of some burden, easing something for them, making something for them and seeing the Face of Christ in them if they’re better off; perhaps even wealthy and finely groomed.
But we’re still doing the same thing. And in building independent means, however small, for our children, our grandchildren, we’re doing the same thing. We’re helping them with family formation (a difficult business nowadays for sure) if nothing else.
So, I respect money for those purposes because I respect the time God has given me on this earth. And I wish to spend both well.
for a more people-oriented society in which we weren’t so forced to live in this ratrace in which things matter more than people and efficiency is the prime directive.)