The Sin of the Capitalism

[Guest Aluigi]

Belloc says so long as there is property tax you don't really own your own property, you're leasing it from the government. That in many respects is quite a true statement.

The idea is that there would be more owners of a means of production, more small businesses. It's not just about decent living wages, that cheapens Rerum Novarum. It's about more people owning their own private businesses. With big businesses the owners are far removed from the employees. Instead of a local manager at the local McDonald's, it's a local owner of a local restaurant. People are failing to grasp the concept of distributism.

People shouldn't be made poorer. There should be competition and working harder to get more. There simply should not be big businesses and franchises spanning all over the place. It makes less and less people the owners of their own means of production, they sell themselves and their time to the corperation. Yes, good for the economy. Slavery was good for the economy too.

Franchises should be dissolved to a bunch of locally owned businesses. The structure that kept them together should be converted to a guild that sets prices and standards and helps keep the economic stability.

In capitalism, most people are forced into jobs in big businesses. They do not own their own means of production, they are as dependent on the business as serfs were on their lords. That's the problem with Capitalism. Distributism is about distributing the ownership of businesses (so long as people will work for them.) Competition is good, and some businesses will do better than others. Classes will be maintained, but the RELATIONSHIP between the classes is cultivated because of the locality of owners to the employees.

[Guest Aluigi]

BUMP for Laudate_Dominum

[Guest Aluigi]

So who wants to take bets on who will destroy Capitalism first, me or LD?

[Laudate_Dominum]

Thank you Aloysius! (Aluigi I suppose)

My experience of Capitalism has been entirely negative, and I've been on both sides of the fence. I've been the capitalist and the slave labourer.

I've had some discussions (and bitter arguments) with different people regarding capitalism and I've noticed that there seems to be a pattern for how people deal with it.
There seem to be people who respond to criticisms of capitalism in an emotionally charged way and often say things like, "there isn't anything better" or, "get with the real world man, this is the way it is, there isn't anything better", or, "capitalism is good, anyone can get rich if he just works hard" (this is a terrible lie). The common element of this category of reaction is what I might call the slave mentality because the responses reflect a person in slavery who has become content in this state. The emotional charge in the statements is because deep down the person knows they are not really happy with capitalism. Also this type of reaction has been most common (in my limited experience) among people in lower class situations.

Another type is the person who is materialy prosperous but who's life is really a struggle to overcome capitalism on its own terms. I don't know how many people I've met who are in this category. They believe that if they work hard and have some lucky breaks they can transcend the state of animal labour and attain a freedom from the shackles of the capitalist system. This is usually not a conscious thing by any means. The mentality is evidenced by the fact that the person works and makes plenty of money (they may be fairly well off or even quite well off) but there ultimate goal is some state that would seem to transcent the capitalism dynamism (for example retirement in a tropical paradise, perhaps buying a farm and being self-sufficient, etc..). So these people are content to play the Capitalism game because they envision an end to their labours which represents liberation from animal labour and the impersonal life structured around capital.

The third type is the person who simply embraces capitalism and who's life is driven by greed and money lust for its own sake. Scrooge would be the textbook example of this type. This is another way to resolve the tension brought about by life in a capitalism system, to surrender to it and become the true capitalist.

I'm being very general but I really believe I have seen these generic types in people. All of them are based on lies and provide no escape from capitalisms dehumanizing forces. The idea that one can defeat capitalism by go along with it for a time (which is usually most of ones life) is false because built into it is the tendency toward consumerism and structures of debt that ensure that the person will be securely kept in capitalisms snare. Also the idea that one can work hard and become rich (an example of defeating capitalism on its own terms) is false because, while it is possible for an average person to start a business or whatever, the system is really structured in favour of the corporate fatcat so most small businesses will fail miserably (resulting in debt) or else succeed for a time but ultimately be devoured by a larger entity. And even if the person is lucky enough to survive and prosper to some extent they have simply become "the capitalist" instead of the exploited worker, and they are still a slave of capitalism, maybe even in a worse position because they may believe the illusion that they are now free.

This post is probably going to tick some people off. I'm really just ranting a bit so don't take me too seriously.

[Guest Aluigi]

Ever read stuff by Belloc or Chesterton?

PM me your email adress and I'll send you Belloc's essay on the Faith and Industrial Capitalism. It's pretty good, but I've never seen it online so I don't think I'm supposed to just post it up here, but through Email I can share my book

Anyway, I agree. But you know what else is slavery: socialism. Unless people can own things, and especially their own means of production, it's still serfdom/slavery

[MichaelFilo]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 21 2005, 11:51 AM'] No offense intended, Mikey, but yours is proabably the weakest argument against captialism I have read.
Greed is a sin of the heart and soul. It is not caused by an economic system.
The economy is about creating and building material wealth, nothing more. It does not force people to be greedy.
The argument that the government should restrict the economy and deliberately make people poorer for the purpose of saving souls is an absurd one. This would be the worst form of unjust government. It would not save souls, but simply build (rightful) resentment against the government.

If I were to rob you, stealing what items and money of yours I deemed excessive, for the sake of saving your soul from materialism and greed and claimed I knew better than you what to do with these goods, what would you think?
I'd still be a thief.

Your arguments make as much sense as saying the government should promote ineffective agricultural methods to hamper farmers in the production of food, so we will not create an over-abundance of food and an atmosphere promoting gluttony! [/quote]
I am sorry for a weak arguement, but I hope you'll keep in mind, I am much younger than the other folk at the debate table.

The arguement against capitalism isn't neccessarily weak, however. The government's job is to follows God's Will and use the power that has been granted it to do so. If an over abundence of food did exist which did result in gluttony, there are many solutions to that, including distrubuting the food to needy countries, or make non-agrarian jobs more appealing. There isn't one cure to a problem. I will continue to reassert that environment is exactly what breeds certain sins. In captialism, you find that, as before mentioned, it is based on greed ([i]Wealth of Nations[/i], Adams Smith). This would neccessarily cause more greed to exist. It is indeed the government's sole responsiblity to carry out God's Will. This includes creating the environment so God's work can be done. If you post pornography on every wall in every room in the country, then you effectivly increase sexual sins throughout the country. Same with the economic system, if it not only allows greed, but requires it to function, then neccessarily it follows that you are breeding greed. While all sins must be avoided by everyone, a government that does no service to it's people in this struggle is no more doing the Will of God then is Lucifier.

Your example of the theif is rather poor. A person who robs me is NOT the government, nor is the government robbing anyone if it rejects captialism and instead uses a form of economic thinking that is less of a breeding ground for evil. The government has been handed power from God, it is it's job to keep doing God's Will which neccessarily includes aiding the citizen to a greater spiritual good.

God bless,
Mikey

[Winchester]

If I have to pay yearly on something or it can be siezed from me or have lein placed upon it, it is not my property.

We are not allowed to own land in the United States. Mineral Rights--typically not ours. School Districts--communism/socialism. Property tax--unregulated and tends to hit residents harder than businesses.

[MichaelFilo]

I never even realized that. Then again I probably won't really get it until I have to start doing my own accounting. I'm only a week into being 16 here.

God bless,

Mikey

[Winchester]

I speak for Houston in the tax area. But I believe it's rather typical, as tax breaks aren't given to residents.

[Socrates]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Jan 25 2005, 12:42 AM'] I am sorry for a weak arguement, but I hope you'll keep in mind, I am much younger than the other folk at the debate table.

The arguement against capitalism isn't neccessarily weak, however. The government's job is to follows God's Will and use the power that has been granted it to do so. If an over abundence of food did exist which did result in gluttony, there are many solutions to that, including distrubuting the food to needy countries, or make non-agrarian jobs more appealing. There isn't one cure to a problem. I will continue to reassert that environment is exactly what breeds certain sins. In captialism, you find that, as before mentioned, it is based on greed ([i]Wealth of Nations[/i], Adams Smith). This would neccessarily cause more greed to exist. It is indeed the government's sole responsiblity to carry out God's Will. This includes creating the environment so God's work can be done. If you post pornography on every wall in every room in the country, then you effectivly increase sexual sins throughout the country. Same with the economic system, if it not only allows greed, but requires it to function, then neccessarily it follows that you are breeding greed. While all sins must be avoided by everyone, a government that does no service to it's people in this struggle is no more doing the Will of God then is Lucifier.

Your example of the theif is rather poor. A person who robs me is NOT the government, nor is the government robbing anyone if it rejects captialism and instead uses a form of economic thinking that is less of a breeding ground for evil. The government has been handed power from God, it is it's job to keep doing God's Will which neccessarily includes aiding the citizen to a greater spiritual good.

God bless,
Mikey [/quote]
Sorry if I may have come across as a bit harsh in my criticism.
I still disagree with you about the role of government and the economy.
The government and economic systems can really only do so much. The point of the economy is the production and trade/distribution of material goods. In itself it will not make anyone virtuuous or non-virtuous. Government systems will do nothing to eliminate greed, etc. The government should certainaly not strive to make its citizens poorer. If people choose to live lives of poverty, or ont have an excess of material goods, this should be their own choice, not that of the government. Voluntary poverty is a virtue. Poverty enforced by the government is not.
Governments are generally very poor at planning the economy and "fairly" distibuting wealth! (Look at the collosal failure of Communism) The system you propose would require unfallen, sinless men to work, and if men were unfallen, government as we know it would be unnecessary anyway.

Your comparison with pornography is also faulty. Pornography is intrinsically sinful and evil. Making money or producing goods or food is not. It is an inordinate love of these things that is sinful. On the other hand, any production or use of porn is a sin.
And it is not the place of government to determine what is inordinate and what is not. This is something that only God can judge. Government officials are as prone to corruption as anyone else. The government that acts as a theif is still a theif. Your ideas are utopian and do not take into account the fallen nature of man.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jan 22 2005, 08:35 PM'] Thank you Aloysius! (Aluigi I suppose)

My experience of Capitalism has been entirely negative, and I've been on both sides of the fence. I've been the capitalist and the slave labourer.

I've had some discussions (and bitter arguments) with different people regarding capitalism and I've noticed that there seems to be a pattern for how people deal with it.
There seem to be people who respond to criticisms of capitalism in an emotionally charged way and often say things like, "there isn't anything better" or, "get with the real world man, this is the way it is, there isn't anything better", or, "capitalism is good, anyone can get rich if he just works hard" (this is a terrible lie). The common element of this category of reaction is what I might call the slave mentality because the responses reflect a person in slavery who has become content in this state. The emotional charge in the statements is because deep down the person knows they are not really happy with capitalism. Also this type of reaction has been most common (in my limited experience) among people in lower class situations.

Another type is the person who is materialy prosperous but who's life is really a struggle to overcome capitalism on its own terms. I don't know how many people I've met who are in this category. They believe that if they work hard and have some lucky breaks they can transcend the state of animal labour and attain a freedom from the shackles of the capitalist system. This is usually not a conscious thing by any means. The mentality is evidenced by the fact that the person works and makes plenty of money (they may be fairly well off or even quite well off) but there ultimate goal is some state that would seem to transcent the capitalism dynamism (for example retirement in a tropical paradise, perhaps buying a farm and being self-sufficient, etc..). So these people are content to play the Capitalism game because they envision an end to their labours which represents liberation from animal labour and the impersonal life structured around capital.

The third type is the person who simply embraces capitalism and who's life is driven by greed and money lust for its own sake. Scrooge would be the textbook example of this type. This is another way to resolve the tension brought about by life in a capitalism system, to surrender to it and become the true capitalist.

I'm being very general but I really believe I have seen these generic types in people. All of them are based on lies and provide no escape from capitalisms dehumanizing forces. The idea that one can defeat capitalism by go along with it for a time (which is usually most of ones life) is false because built into it is the tendency toward consumerism and structures of debt that ensure that the person will be securely kept in capitalisms snare. Also the idea that one can work hard and become rich (an example of defeating capitalism on its own terms) is false because, while it is possible for an average person to start a business or whatever, the system is really structured in favour of the corporate fatcat so most small businesses will fail miserably (resulting in debt) or else succeed for a time but ultimately be devoured by a larger entity. And even if the person is lucky enough to survive and prosper to some extent they have simply become "the capitalist" instead of the exploited worker, and they are still a slave of capitalism, maybe even in a worse position because they may believe the illusion that they are now free.

This post is probably going to tick some people off. I'm really just ranting a bit so don't take me too seriously. [/quote]
You've provided a critique of capitalism, but have not provided a solution, or told what you think would work better.

[MichaelFilo]

I concede that my ideals are utopian, and will agree that indeed you are correct, I have not taken into account man's fallen state. However, I cannot remit my point that certain situations are more likely to breed sin than others. And I also cannot remit that the government often controls the morality, or lack there of, in the environment of its citizen. Censorship, allowing contraception, government aid to abortion "clinics", etc. all aid in some way shape or form to a destructive environment to the citizen spiritually. The form of economy is only one way that this is so. Keeping immoral situations farther away from people is a protection against sin and something government has the power to do. God didn't allow governments to exist if he had not intended great power to be given to them. Even Jesus proclaimed that the ability to crucify him was given from the Father, and if in punishment government is given such power, than surely in preservation of the people the government will be granted much more power.

God bless,
Mikey

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 25 2005, 10:57 AM'] You've provided a critique of capitalism, but have not provided a solution, or told what you think would work better. [/quote]
Radical Distributism/Feudalism/Monarchism.

j/k

I think a lot of the socialist aspects of our own country counter balance a lot of the crappy capitalist tendencies, but this is not even close to a solution.......

The solution is to first go on welfare, foodstamps and all taht and devote your time to writing anti-capitalist materials to promote revolution. The answer is either anarchy or death, I haven't decided which one yet. ok, I'm kidding again. I wish I had the answer, but I'm not that smart. I can think of outlandish answers but nothing realistic.

[Socrates]

Laudate, your honesty is commendable!

[Guest Aluigi]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 25 2005, 10:57 AM'] You've provided a critique of capitalism, but have not provided a solution, or told what you think would work better. [/quote]
this thread is about Capitalism being wrong.
There is another thread about Socialism being wrong.
There is another thread with the solution of Distributism.