Rush returns to the air waves on Tuesday, December 3. Having devoted a large segment of his Thursday broadcast to this topic, I expect the topic will resurface on that show.
Too long a read. Rush only dedicated a few paragraphs of content to the issue, and this guy spent a ton time to hit Rush back on Rush’s brief commentary.
Not only did Rush incorrectly read the Exhortation, his counter example, of iPhone manufactured in China driven by American consumers’ demand, is cheesy.
It would be good to see Chinese demand fueling Chinese industry. It would be good to see American demand fueling American industry. Instead we have a rather frivolous American demand (what they had no phones before iPhone?) fueling employment in China. Now some Chinese make a product not invented in China and not particularly needed (for its cost) in China; some Americans are out of work because the American demand is sourced to China. This is not free market: this is a convolution possible because some governments and some international bankers made this Ponzi scheme possible. If it were just about x iPhone owners and y Chinese electronic factory workers, we could merely say, —whatever. This would be an irrelevance, a fluke in the flow of normal commerce. But this is a system whereby Ohio sits on welfare, the Bay Area is filled with six figure salary earners, often from a foreign country, sharing closet-size condos, driven into childlessness, and the rest of Central California on welfare, and China now having our industrial base. For Rush to promote this ship of fools as functioning capitalism is plain idiocy.
Communism (marxism) is the philosophy of envy and thievery, lies and murder. It is not the denial of necessary goods. Not sure why Catholics have such a tough time defining evil.
We’re in big effing trouble when we equate some radio entertainer’s blabber to the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation.
this particular pope being the good jesuit he is, spouts communist doctrine and then turns around and says oh no that’s not what I meant…. and his defenders scurry to make it so
I agree that the Pope condemns consumerism. But he also condemns capitalism. Check out paragraph 54.
The Pope has made his choice. The poor, he makes clear, are morally superior. He chooses to associate with them and condemn those who attain a degree of wealth, as how could anyone justify having any wealth when there are starving people in the world?
As for me, I have made by choice. I will follow Jesus.
Here is what Jesus said regarding the moral superiority of the poor. After saying it is harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than for a camel to pass through an eye of a needle, his disciples said, who then can be saved. They said this because the Jews of that time generally thought wealth was a sign of the elect. Jesus did not respond, you Jews have it wrong. It’s not the rich who are going to heaven, it is the poor. No, he responded, by man this is impossible; but, by God, it is possible.
If your point is to criticize Rush, your point is valid. He (Rush) should have been more politick. But, if your point is to exonerate the Pope, no, the excesses of Rush do not excuse an error by the Pope. Right now, many conservative Catholics are grappling with this document. I think the only proper response to this document is to pray for the unity of the faithful.
Matthew 21:12 (KJV)
“And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves.” So, Pope Francis is in good company.
The Pope (why one, all of them!) could learn a great deal from the Great Wise Men of the American radio, the Catholic gurus like Savage (not his real name!) or Levin (his real name?) Is Woo Woo Ginsburg still around?
This article is pure spin! The Pope was quite clear when he was condemning “trickle down economics” and “unfettered markets” and condemning those who do not want to provide the necessary “regulations” and political interventions.
The Catholics are fighting us out over the definition of “is,” and they’re even slicker than Slick Willy on it.
The words of Francis, without the spin, stand on their own quite well.
So the pope said “consumerism”, not “capitalism”?
If so, that changes things.
From the Pope’s mouth:
“54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting. To sustain a lifestyle which excludes others, or to sustain enthusiasm for that selfish ideal, a globalization of indifference has developed. Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own. The culture of prosperity deadens us; we are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase; and in the meantime all those lives stunted for lack of opportunity seem a mere spectacle; they fail to move us.
No to the new idolatry of money
55. One cause of this situation is found in our relationship with money, since we calmly accept its dominion over ourselves and our societies. The current financial crisis can make us overlook the fact that it originated in a profound human crisis: the denial of the primacy of the human person! We have created new idols. The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose. The worldwide crisis affecting finance and the economy lays bare their imbalances and, above all, their lack of real concern for human beings; man is reduced to one of his needs alone: consumption.
56. While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ideologies which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. Consequently, they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control. A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. Debt and the accumulation of interest also make it difficult for countries to realize the potential of their own economies and keep citizens from enjoying their real purchasing power. To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which have taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits. In this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, which become the only rule... With this in mind, I encourage financial experts and political leaders to ponder the words of one of the sages of antiquity: “Not to share one’s wealth with the poor is to steal from them and to take away their livelihood. It is not our own goods which we hold, but theirs”.
” Welfare projects, which meet certain urgent needs, should be considered merely temporary responses...We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the invisible hand of the market. Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded.
205. I ask God to give us more politicians capable of sincere and effective dialogue aimed at healing the deepest roots – and not simply the appearances – of the evils in our world! Politics, though often denigrated, remains a lofty vocation and one of the highest forms of charity, inasmuch as it seeks the common good.[174] We need to be convinced that charity “is the principle not only of micro-relationships (with friends, with family members or within small groups) but also of macro-relationships (social, economic and political ones)”.[175] I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor! It is vital that government leaders and financial leaders take heed and broaden their horizons, working to ensure that all citizens have dignified work, education and healthcare...
... Indeed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find local solutions for enormous global problems which overwhelm local politics with difficulties to resolve. If we really want to achieve a healthy world economy, what is needed at this juncture of history is a more efficient way of interacting which, with due regard for the sovereignty of each nation, ensures the economic well-being of all countries, not just of a few.”
“The pontiff was merely reiterating consistent Church teaching that supports a free market, but also reminds the moral obligation to act responsibly, honestly and prudently.”
Ummm...no. Read what the POPE said, not this guy’s spin. The Pope is calling for political leaders to impose economic ‘justice’ instead of allowing free people to make free choices in a free market. He wants “a more efficient way of interacting which, with due regard for the sovereignty of each nation, ensures the economic well-being of all countries, not just of a few.” How you get that without one world government, he doesn’t bother to explain. But then, explanations are what his handlers do as they follow him around, trying to explain what the Pope REALLY said...
That said, besides personal acts of Christian charity, it is logical and reasonable, prudent and necessary to pool resources and, even for the state, to help in cases where the most needy and most urgent cases are helped. Yet no pope ever promoted, nor called for, a welfare state that perpetually cares for the poor. The ultimate goal is to enable the poor to rise above poverty and reach a level of dignity commensurate with their human dignity.
If trickle down was working today, we would not have the 24,000,000 that Romney said were looking for work.
Indeed, that is a problem that still vexes Bible scholars trying to do a decent modern language translation of the Bible from the original languages used for each Book of the Bible.
In fact, the Church has always emphasized communitarian values, charity, and social justice over individualism, and (in contrast to Calvinism, for instance) never equated acquisition of wealth with virtue. This is as much true of rightwing traditional Catholicism as it is of the renegade "liberation theology" Left. Distributism, social credit, and corporatism grew out of traditional Catholic social thought and criticism of laissez-faire.