Distributism (JD Vance)

Much like Chesterton and Belloc posited and argued for a third way, a path that did not look like Monopoly Capitalism or State Socialism, we may be some arguing for this now.

I came across what I thought was a fascinating interview by Bishop Barron of Vice President JD Vance. I am a big fan of anything Bishop Barron puts out, not just because I agree with him, but because I find him to be one of the top intellectuals of our day. Listen to his debates, discussions and interviews. Watch the speech he gave at America’s 250th birthday. Suffice to say, the algo’s populate my feed with his content.

I did not know what to expect of the interview when I saw it. JD Vance has become a figure that is somewhat vilified on both the left and the right. The left sees him as Trump’s attack dog, lacking civility, and embodying the same brutal message. The right sees many of his comments, particularly where he said that maybe we need to move beyond the views of Milton Friedman, as an abandonment of core conservative ideology.

I encourage you to listen whether you like him or not. You will surely learn something. That is important since he is likely leading the ticket in 2028. You might want to know what you are (or aren’t) voting for.

However, this simply isn't true in other societies and cultures, particularly in Europe where the Right is often opposed to laissez-faire economics, either out of ideological nostalgia for feudal or mercantilist institutions or the perception that libertarian economics leads to an extreme competitive individualism that undermines traditional communities and culture, whereas their primary goal is upholding a communitarian sense of national identity and unity.

There is certainly an element of social Darwinism on the American Right. As one of life's "losers," I am certainly open to right wing alternatives to laissez-faire.

What is your opinion of Social Credit? How does it differ from distributism (the answer is probably obvious to most FReepers but I've never been a maven of economics)?

However, there are dangers on that Right as well as on the Left. The first government in history that called itself totalitarian was Fascist Italy (though it never really was, and Mussolini defined "totalitarianism" very differently from how we do today). My motto in life is "be open to everything, but always exercise the most extreme caution." I hope that's not like a "square circle."

What is your opinion of Social Credit? How does it differ from distributism

To be honest, I haven't really researched the Social Credit movement enough to have an opinion, perhaps I'll have to look into Douglas' writings or those of his followers at some time.

The first government in history that called itself totalitarian was Fascist Italy (though it never really was, and Mussolini defined "totalitarianism" very differently from how we do today

For all his flaws and stupid geopolitical moves, Mussolini's system was far more benevolent than other "totalitarian" regimes in Europe and beyond at the time, at least until he became a puppet of Hitler rather than an independent actor. His regime did not murder or even imprison political opponents en masse - usually they would be warned or roughed up, told to keep their views to themselves, and given the option to leave the country.

There was considerably more personal freedom under Mussolini than e.g. under Franco, never mind Hitler (or even more so leftist totalitarian regimes like Stalin and later Mao), without much in the way of book bans or the like. Furthermore, Mussolini was supportive of a strong private sector - his regime privatized many state-owned or run enterprises when he came to power, putting the lie to the claim that his regime was a leftist movement. One thing he had in common with some distributists was replacing trade unions (which were effectively banned) with "worker corporations" - i.e. guilds that would negotiate salaries while holding standard to worker conduct and production.

I say this not to argue that we should mimic Mussolini's regime, but simply to point out that there are other models of statecraft and economic/industrial policy besides laissez-faire and Marxist socialism, despite the fact that both Marxists and classical liberals like to claim that those are the only two alternatives.

I watched the video. I did not hear the words “Distributist” or “Distributism” one time. I didn’t hear anything like it. Can you point me to the minute he talks about it?

There was nothing objectionable about the video.

Perhaps a lot of hay is being made contrasting Friedman/Reagan in the 1980s and President Trump. Vance sensibly says that we are influenced by our times.

Back in the 1980s we had the cold war. The backdrop was the possibility of a hot war. It would be a conventional war with the possibility of going nuclear. General industrial policy did not figure into the cold war. Maybe some specific materials were restricted to the military, but no one care where our food or pharmaceuticals came from.

Times are different. We have had porous borders and our enemies have crossed them. Biological warfare is a reality like never before. We recognize that our industrial base has declined and the skills that undergird them are greatly reduced or gone.

Different times require different policies. That’s what I heard from Vance.

JD Vance has explicitly referenced and discussed distributism as a framework for political and economic thought. In an interview on the Joe Rogan Experience, he has discussed distributism as an economic “third way” found in Christian social teaching that contrasts with both libertarian free-market capitalism and socialism. He frequently relates the concept to creating an “ownership economy”.

He explained his views by noting:“...there’s a Christian idea of political economy that’s actually been lost in American politics, where it’s like we think of it as libertarianism, the hardcore free market, versus socialism or communism. And there actually is a third way that has existed in pretty much all Christian economic thinking going back 2,000 years ago,” as noted by The Stakehold.

He has also referenced the late 19th-century papal encyclical “Rerum Novarum” — the foundational text of distributism — when applying these principles to modern issues like artificial intelligence.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.