The book is a series of essays that attempt to answer the question posed by the title. In the end, it may not be possible to give a definitive answer, but one thing is clear from history. Where responsible capitalism has flourished there has tended to be more personal freedom. And if we agree with the founders that 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' are inalienable rights granted to us by our Creator, then capitalism comes far closer than any of the various utopian ideologies to providing an environment in which those rights may be exercised.
Well The Bible clearly states...
He who does not work, neither shall he eat.
I think capitalism is good for Christianity and vice versa. Charitable donarions are given freely, willingly and voluntarily to help the poor. People with jobs go to church and when the collection plate is passed around give what they can. Charities and churches benefit the poor by providing them with food, clothing and other necessities for life and living. None of this would be possible if people did not have jobs and earned a living for themselves and their families.
Well if it is not, it is certainaly conservative
...and anyone else you think might be interested.
Cheers!
Visit here for a listing of his books.
Novak's own personal journey to his conclusions in "Democratic Capitalism" should be of interest also.
It is unchristian to be a burden on everyone else, steal their earnings, live like a pig, and then expect your fellow man to take care of you. Talk about un-Christian!
Capitalism is the naturally-generated economic system which develops within a free society. It’s not the brainchild of a Marx, Engels or Obama.
I think we can all draw our own conclusions from there.
Capitalism is NOT selfishness.
The question as it is posed infers it, because culture teaches us that capitalists ARE selfish people.
Culture also teaches us that belief in God is based on ignorance and narrow mindedness... that blind faith in an invisible God is only an excuse for lack of intelligence.
Put another way, this very question is really not a question at all... it is a statement that translates to “Christians are Selfish”
Capitalism if anything is simply an admission to the fact that all men are sinners who act in their own self interest.. and that it is impossible in this dispensation for society to purge man of his carnal tendencies.
Why use the word “Capitalism?” It was invented by Marx.
Isn’t there a better word for “the freedom of individiduals to keep their own property?”
Frederick Engels
Neither Christian or non Christian. Its an economic trade medium or method.
Obama and the other followers of Liberation Theology believe that Jesus was a socialist and that the Apostle Paul was the greatest community organizer of all time.
As opposed to what?
Capitalism is not a “system” as leftists like to say. Capitalism is simply the manifestation of freedom — free people acting freely to better their lives but without infringing on the freedom and rights of others. Socialism IS a system. It’s a system of control where people are slaves to an elite ruling class.
another philospher tackles this question- Michael Novak
http://www.michaelnovak.net/index.cfm?fuseaction=bookshelf.welcome&id=10
Interestingly, President Bush used the term “democratic capitalism” when publicly addressing the financial crisis in 2008. Someone should give zerO a copy of the book.
I think the question is very important politically and at the deepest levels.
Ronald Reagan was supported by social (usually religious) conservatives and economic conservatives. Libertarians try to have economic conservatism only. Governor Huckabee is socially conservative, but I don't think he is an economic conservative. I don't think either approach is politically strong, and they open they open the door to socialism.
I think a complete reading of the Bible shows more passages that are pro, than anti, capitalism (free enterprise). I remember a parable from Christ about paying workers a fixed amount for their effort one day, regardless of whether they were hired early in the morning, in the late morning, or in the afternoon. Some complained that it was unfair to receive the same pay while working different hours. He was not sympathetic. A contract is a contract. They should mind their own business. It was a parable, about going to heaven, but the literal story shouldn't be lost either.
Those critical of markets repeat the quote about it being easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to go to heaven. But that quote should be read carefully. It so happens that a rich man elected not to give up his riches to follow God incarnate in man. That was an extreme case, because Christ seldom walks the earth. A politician might also have chosen not to give up his power, in order to follow Christ. The general lesson is that we can be led astray by worldly temptations. This applies to money, power, and anything else that may receive an undue importance in our lives. It is bad theology to take the quote and turn it into an attack against "the rich."
There are commandments against coveting your neighbor's possessions (wealth), and against theft (excessive taxes), but not against "greed."
Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25) 14"(K)For it is just like a man (L)about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them.
15"To one he gave five (M)talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he (N)went on his journey.
16"Immediately the one who had received the five (O)talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents.
17"In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more.
18"But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money.
19"Now after a long time the master of those slaves came and (P)settled accounts with them.
20"The one who had received the five (Q)talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, 'Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.'
21"His master said to him, 'Well done, good and (R)faithful slave You were faithful with a few things, I will (S)put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.'
22"Also the one who had received the two (T)talents came up and said, 'Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.'
23"His master said to him, 'Well done, good and (U)faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.'
24"And the one also who had received the one (V)talent came up and said, 'Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed.
25'And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.'
26"But his master answered and said to him, 'You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed.
27'Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest.
28'Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.'
29"(W)For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.
Well and truly said, newheart!
The "utopian ideologies" are degenerate cases of capitalism, in the sense that they start with the idea of "capitalism," and then spend the rest of their time trying to figure out all the ways it can possibly be "mucked up." Then they "scare us" with their "results." "Make us mad." And offer "solutions" by means of mass protest.
What is called "the rules for radicals" is the persuasive inculcation in the human mind of mindless tropes, constructed by the clueless, for the benefit of the clueless.
This seems to be the basis on which "politics" moves these days. In short, as far away as possible from the idea of capitalism as both the foundation and expression of fruitful human liberty.
Thanks ever so much for your excellent post!
"In the book, Weber wrote that capitalism in northern Europe evolved when the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant ethic was a force behind an unplanned and uncoordinated mass action that influenced the development of capitalism. This idea is also known as "the Weber thesis". ...
If you're not familiar with God's word, I suppose, but to a Bible reader, its obvious: a free economy can only spring from the gospel of Jesus Christ.