J.D. Vance, Ownership Advocate

The Stakehold ^ | July 20, 2026 | Mark Hand

[ProgressingAmerica]

...

On AI and distributism

Vance starts the segment with a reference to the Catholic social doctrine of distributism (i.e. the ownership economy).

...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.

Distributism has been around 140 years or so, and is typically traced back to Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum,5 which Vance references later when discussing AI:

...Now, there’s this fascinating encyclical written by Pope Leo XIII. I’ll send it to you. It’s one of the best things that I think has ever been written by a Christian leader where it’s written in the late 19th century. And the basic argument of it is that in the age of industrial churn, there has to be a middle way between six-year-olds working on the factory floor and socialism.

Part of the solution is to give workers a sort of say in what’s going on. Give normal people some power in this system. And I think that’s the thing we have to figure out with AI… Control over what their kids are seeing, control over, you know, the economic forces that are being unleashed by AI, some certainty that they’re not going to wake up in a world where they can’t buy a home, but some other guy owns 35 mansions, right?

That to me is the fundamental challenge of AI. It’s that it’s going to unleash a lot of wealth creation, but if that wealth creation all goes to some segment of people, you’re going to have communism. Like that is the choice before us. A lot of wealth being created—that’s good by the way. I like wealth being created. But if you don’t ensure that there’s some broader prosperity from that wealth creation, like we have run this experiment before and it leads to communism, right?

---

TOPICS: Reference
KEYWORDS: distributism; jdvance; rerumnovarum

[ProgressingAmerica]

Continuing an earlier discussion about concepts around Distributism.

Something I noticed in reading this is the fallacy around ownership. Capitalism is the private property system. The idea that you wouldn't own property in the property system defies logic, but that's where the concept rests. That's what some of these op/eds indicate which I have been reading, is that instead of capitalism we should have private property! It's kind of a joke.

I think worse, is the fallacy that the only way to prevent communism is big ultra massive intrusive abusive government. If big ultra massive intrusive abusive government is our future we have no future worth looking forward to.

[Dr. Sivana]

If over time, large companies, public or private, accumulate wealth and power because of the wealth, they influence laws to make true competition difficult or impossible.

You think about companies like Pfizer, Bayer/Monsanto, Gannett, and now Microsoft and Alphabet, and they almost become government entities in their own right. The Sherman Anti-Trust Law was meant to keep a monopolist or Trust from running the game.

[pierrem15]

You don't need worker ownership or "workers councils." You need a labor shortage and controlled international trade that forces capital to invest in productivity and business process improvement.

The main problem we have now is not "shareholder value" but an insulated and ignorant management class that thinks its job is to strip-mine every company it manages to bloat their own pay, options, and that of selected, large-block shareholders by slashing wages, outsourcing, reducing quality, etc. All they know is a spreadsheet: they know nothing about building cars, airplanes, steel, etc. Because they are ignoramuses, the only way they see to increase profits is to decrease costs at the expense of American wages: outsource, H1Bs and other visa workers, cut quality.

They and connected "activist" shareholders and banks cash in and in the end they just dump the stock on rubes like you and me and pension funds. It's a sophisticated form of pump-and-dump fraud.

The more capital is effectively controlled by a narrow group of schmucks like this, the more certain socialists will be elected. Because mere poverty with no chance of advancement but stability is better than than poverty with no chance of advancement combined with the precariousness of unemployment, no health insurance, and homelessness.

[Georgia Girl 2]

We already have all this JD. Its called unions. The Catholic church which I’m happy to belong to does not dictate the economic system of the United States. I’ve been a catholic since JD Vance was 2 years old and this is the first I’ve heard that the church pushes distributism. He’s been a Catholic for 15 minutes and suddenly he’s the end all know all of the catholic church.

Here’s another point. Who gets to decide how much of a “voice” the people get in running the economy? Who are you identifying as the “people”? In these crazy socialist type models you can intersperse the word “ people” with “government”.

[ClearCase_guy]

Bfl

I find Distributism quite interesting. Not entirely socialism. Some features seem to fix excesses in economics that I see today. It emphasizes morals and whether it succeeds or fails I think it means well, which I cannot say about communism.

[central_va]

But you deny there is a problem and what is happening is sustainable.

[Georgia Girl 2]

“Not entirely socialism”

You my friend are the frog in the pot. JD Vance is the Judas goat leading you down the road.

[Alberta's Child]

Here's the labor vs. management conundrum in a nutshell:

If you are a UAW worker employed by the Ford Motor Company, you are generally better off with your pension fund investing in Toyota than in Ford.

It's kind of ludicrous, but that's how the "free flow of capital" works.

[Georgia Girl 2]

The minute I hear how you should hate the guy with 35 mansions because you work at Wal-Mart and live in a mobile home I’m hearing communism. You should want to be just like the guy with 35 mansions and try to figure out how to make your own little empire. That’s why we live in a free society.

[Alberta's Child]

Distributism and unions are two completely different things.

Under pure distributism, unions would not exist because companies would have no employees. Instead, every worker would function as an independent contractor who had 100% ownership of his skills, capabilities, tools, etc.

The assembly line worker would sign a one-year contract to work for General Motors. If GM doesn't pay him what he thinks he's worth, he offers his services to Honda instead.

[Georgia Girl 2]

We already have full ownership of our labor now. If you don’t get the job offer you want you keep interviewing.

Every company has a bottom line. They know how much they can afford to pay workers and still make A profit. You may want $100 per hour but if they can only afford $60 per hour that’s all they’re going to offer.

Who gets to make the decision that a company can’t have employees anymore? The government. Who gets to set the hourly contract wage when it becomes apparent that companies are only hiring the cheapest workers? The government.

Don’t be the frog in the pot.

I can tell you this. After listening to his blather for the last few weeks JD Vance is the last person in the world I would vote for for President. He would be a disaster. I would vote for Ted Cruz over him.

[Responsibility2nd]

I look at Distributism as a Catholic theocratic idea and as an Evangelical, I am skeptical of it and JD.

what is the evangelical christian viewpoint on the catholic idea of distrubutism

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-is-the-evangelical-christ-obmAY_HoTKKHrmUS38Lkgg

[Alberta's Child]

You’re forgetting that corporations basically employ our own elected officials. How’s that working out for America?

[Danie_2023]

“”We already have all this JD. Its called unions. The Catholic church which I’m happy to belong to does not dictate the economic system of the United States. I’ve been a catholic since JD Vance was 2 years old and this is the first I’ve heard that the church pushes distributism. He’s been a Catholic for 15 minutes and suddenly he’s the end all know all of the catholic church.

Here’s another point. Who gets to decide how much of a “voice” the people get in running the economy? Who are you identifying as the “people”? In these crazy socialist type models you can intersperse the word “ people” with “government”.””

***

I’m curious, so I have to ask. I’m in the process of researching what Vance has actually said vs. what some pundits are saying he said. I’m studying the transcripts of the Joe Rogan #2526 podcast and the one with Bishop Barron on July 17, and I have yet to find anything Vance said that matches what he’s being accused of having said.

So here’s my question. What actual quote of Vance’s do you take issue with? Can you point me to it? I’m trying to vet Vance in regards to the 2028 election.. and if there’s something really “off” with him... rather than merely what his political opponents are accusing him of... I need to know about it. Can you help me out here?

Thanks.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Capitalism isn’t perfect, but its the best thing out there.

I think its hysterical to listen to all the freepers who have railed against the government suddenly jump on board the distributism train because some wet behind the ears 41 year old dusted off Chesterton and decided he’d found something new. The last time I heard the name was in one of my Poly Sci classes at FSU in 1969. 😆

[Southside_Chicago_Republican]

Bookmark

[Alberta's Child]

Capitalism isn’t perfect, but its the best thing out there.

I agree. The problem is that "crony capitalism" -- which is the political/economic system in which we live here in the U.S. -- is NOT capitalism.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Personally I think the best advice I can give you is just listen to JD Vance as much as possible. The more you listen to him the more you will realize how much gobbeldee gook you are hearing.

But to be specific. Vance said that Margaret Thatcher’s policies led to the mess that Britain is in. ???????

Vance criticized Milton Friedman who was one of our best economic thinkers and a close advisor to Ronald Reagan. He then went on expound on how relieved he was that we have drifted into a more Hamiltonian approach.

Now he’s spouting this distributism crapola and has half of FR hopping on board.

Vance does not view the US as the leader of the world. He’s a non interventionist and we’ve had enough of those.

Vance is framing himself as a reasonable moderate. The majority of the representatives in the House are reasonable moderates which is why we can never get a decent Speaker elected.

Its five minutes til midnight. When Trump leaves office it will be 10 minutes til midnight. I don’t want a reasonable moderate dithering around in the oval office. I want a forceful leader of the world with a clear vision for this country and it ain’t distributism and anti-intervention.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Distributism is not the answer. Government out of business except for basic perameters is the answer.

[Danie_2023]

“”Vance is framing himself as a reasonable moderate. The majority of the representatives in the House are reasonable moderates which is why we can never get a decent Speaker elected.

Its five minutes til midnight. When Trump leaves office it will be 10 minutes til midnight. I don’t want a reasonable moderate dithering around in the oval office. I want a forceful leader of the world with a clear vision for this country and it ain’t distributism and anti-intervention.””

***

I don’t want a ‘squish’ in the WH in 2028 either... but you do realize that all candidates have to somewhat present themselves as moderate on some issues in order to attract the Independent voters, right?

As for Vance pushing distributism... what quote of his is showing that? I can’t find it. I have, however, found a vast difference between what Vance said in the Joe Rogan podcast about Israel... and what pundits have ‘said’ he said. Their take on what he said, IOW, is not JD favorable and I’m wondering if this latest “anti-Vance pushing Distributism” is another example of that same type of BS.

In the Bishop Barron interview, the word Distributism is not mentioned and I’m still trying to find the part in the interview where Vance even alluded to it. I dunno.

One thing I will mention about what you said about unions.... American unions have been a disaster re: what the union members actually want or are for. They are forced to pay dues that go to the Democrats even if/when they are not pro-Democrat. I think Vance is just saying we need something better, something that really IS equal and fair. All I know from his comments is he is anti-socialism and that ain’t bad in my book.

Thanks for the feedback.