Posted on 08/18/2011 5:58:55 AM PDT by NYer
Exactly. bttt
If you read him carefully, you see that he denounces “CRONY capitalism”, which isn’t capitalism at all-— it is “Interventionism” by the government in the private market. We haven’t been living under the true definition of capitalism in this country for 100 years.
This pope will agree with this statement:
“Only capitalism operates on the basis of respect for free, independent, responsible persons. All other systems in varying degrees treat men as less than this.
“Socialist systems above all treat men as pawns to be moved about by the authorities, or as children to be given what the rulers decide is good for them, or as serfs or slaves. The rulers begin by boasting about their compassion, which in any case is fraudulent, but after a time they drop this pretense which they find unnecessary for the maintenance of power. In all things they act on the presumption that they know best.
“Therefore they and their systems are morally stunted. Only the free system, the much assailed capitalism, is morally mature.” ~ Dr. Ronald H. Nash
MORE:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2643993/posts?page=16#16
In other words, crony capitalism is simply another name for socialism, but with a three-piece business suit.
Yep! bttt
Thank you, battousai, for an excellent clarification of the pope’s statement and how the msm skewed it to suit their agenda. I have pinged freeper RoadTest to your post because he missed it.
Actually, people who ONLY care about profit do not generally do very well over the long term in free market economies.
It’s people who have a passion for their product, a passion to do a job well, a passion to make their customers happy that become the biggest successes. Profit follows service.
What was reported in this article:
Pope Benedict XVI on Thursday denounced the profit-at-all-cost mentality he says is behind Europe's current economic crisis. The pontiff insisted that morals and ethics must play a greater role in formulating economic policy in the future.
"Man must be at the centre of the economy and the economy must not be measured only by the maximization of profit but according to the common good," the pontiff told reporters aboard his plane as he travelled to Madrid for the Catholic Church's World Youth Day.
What the Holy Father actually said:
A. – And thus, it is confirmed in the current economic crisis that which had already appeared in previous great crises, that the ethical dimension is not something external to economic problems, but an inner and fundamental dimension. The economy does not only work with a self-regulated market, but needs an ethical way of reasoning in order to work for man. It appears again that what Pope John Paul II had already said in his first social encyclical: man must be the center of the economy and the economy is not to be measured solely according to achieving maximum profits. Its true measure is according to how it serves the good of everyone, including taking responsibility for others, and it works really well only if it works in a humane manner with respect for others. This includes different dimensions. The first is that individuals take responsibility for their nation and not just for themselves. The second is that nations must take responsibility for the world - beyond their own national interests, even a continent like Europe must not think only of its own good but assume responsibility for all of humanity and should always think about its economic problems in the light of this responsibility for other parts of the world: for those who are suffering, thirsty and hungry, and have no future. And then - the third dimension of this responsibility – is the responsibility for the future. We know that we must protect our planet, but we must protect - all in all - the functioning of the service of economic work for everyone by reckoning that tomorrow is also today. If the youth of today have no prospects in life, our today has made a mistake and is 'evil'. Therefore, the Church with her social doctrine, with its doctrine of responsibility to God, opens man up to the possibility of renouncing profit and seeing things in the religious and humanistic dimension, that is to live for one another. Thus open even the paths. The large number of volunteers who work in different parts of the world, not for themselves but for others, and thereby find meaning in life, show that this is possible and that educating young people to aspire to these great purposes, such as the Church is trying to do, is essential for our future.
Naturally, FReepers, who normally question everything reported in the media, take it at face value. Unsurprising.
I would also point out that the definitive Catholic criticism of socialism was laid out 100+ years ago by Pope Leo XIII. It has not been repealed or abrogated.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/L13APOST.HTM
Here’s a little tidbit:
“While the socialists would destroy the “right” of property, alleging it to be a human invention altogether opposed to the inborn equality of man, and, claiming a community of goods, argue that poverty should not be peaceably endured, and that the property and privileges of the rich may be rightly invaded, the Church, with much greater wisdom and good sense, recognizes the inequality among men, who are born with different powers of body and mind, inequality in actual possession, also, and holds that the right of property and of ownership, which springs from nature itself, must not be touched and stands inviolate. For she knows that stealing and robbery were forbidden in so special a manner by God, the Author and Defender of right, that He would not allow man even to desire what belonged to another, and that thieves and despoilers, no less than adulterers and idolaters, are shut out from the Kingdom of Heaven. “
“Pope needs to shut up and concentrate on saving souls.
Free enterprise, i.e. “capitalism” is the only ethical economic system. It is the free and un-coerced exchange of goods and services. What sort of coercion does he propose to inflict on the system?”
It was Pope Leo XIII who declared that no one could at the same time be a Catholic and a true Socialist. People use the “Socialism” to mean different things. Pope Leo used the term in the 17th c. What did he mean?
In the encyclical “Rerum Novarum”, Leo XIII took up the notion of socialism - capitalism and compared those to the Church’s own views.
The principal thrust of Leo XIII’s analysis (shared by later popes) is not negative but positive. He recognized that, in some way, all people are in need. That’s just how life is. In meeting those needs, he said, the remedial agent most proximate to the need is the proper one to relieve the need. Therefore, for example, if my child is hungry, I should not rely on the neighbors, the Church, the city or the county or the state or the nation to feed my child if I can feed my child myself. Nor should those more distant entities undertake the task if I can do it, because it encourages me to neglect my duty to my child and encourages both me and my child to become dependant on distant entities to do that which we would be more moral in doing ourselves.
That’s called “subsidiarity”.
Socialism is using the coercive power of the state to redistribute goods contrary to what the marketplace would do. The marketplace insists that if I want something someone else has produced, I must give something of reasonably equal value in return. Since “swapping” is in efficient, we use money as a “symbol” of production and trade.
Socialism would simply be market economics if that’s what they did but it doesn’t. Socialism insists that what I produce must be given to another who has not produced something of reasonably equal value, and that I must give it and not receive value for it. So, it’s an involuntary servitude, to a degree. Since people don’t usually want to do that, they must be forced to do it by the power of the state. Ultimately, the power of the state depends on its power to incarcerate or kill me, because one or the other happens if I resist sufficiently to get it to that point.
That conflicts with the Church’s position in several ways. The most important is that it’s contrary to “subsidiarity”. The capable entity most proximate to the need is not generally the level of government that has the power to incarcerate or kill me, but is far down the scale from that. Nor, under “subsidiarity” does coercion necessarily have to be involved. Take food again. One has to get to at least the state level in the U.S. before reaching an entity with the power to coerce my neighbor to give my child something for nothing by law and if one refuses penalties are incurred. Socialism puts the duty on the highest and most removed entity immediately; the national government.
Furthermore, when my child depends on the national government for his existence, he becomes a creature of the state and the pupil of the state, not of his family, friends, Church, and so on.
The child thus learns the values of the state, not that of family, friends, Church, etc., and it is destructive to everything in between. If I get used to the idea that the national government will feed my child, I am encouraged to neglect my natural and moral duties to the child, and so on. In doing that, I also become a dependant of the state and subject to its will more than would otherwise be the case.
That is not to say that Pope Leo XIII felt no one should help my child if the parents cannot. But he did say the next most proximate competent entity should then do it. Neighborhood, Church, city, etc. Only when none of them can do it effectively should the highest entities of government do it.
Leo XIII felt, and being very distrustful of resorting to dependency on large entities of any kind, whether government, big business or anything like them, that certain provisions should be made for those in need who cannot help themselves and who cannot be helped by more proximate entities. If, say, disabled people simply cannot be provided for in any other way, then it is the duty of the state to provide decently for them, and if coercion is unavoidable, then it must resort to it in order to protect human dignity. Then, and only then, can the state, in effect, violate voluntary associations (the market) and cause me to give what I produce to someone who does not reciprocate to the economy.
The problems, then, with socialism, is that it is a concept that resorts to high-end coercion instantly, in order to meet needs as it sees them regardless of the ability of more proximate entites to do it. It sweeps aside voluntarism in principle, and tends to exact agreement with its dicta in other ways because it can, all others being dependant on it. It’s the concept, not the particular small applications, that is the problem.
As applied, socialism tends to provide things routinely that can be provided more proximately, and arrogates to itself, increasingly, the role of doing it. That’s why what is commonly termed “middle class welfare” is wrong. If ones parents and/or child are capable of working to put the individual through college, even if it takes more effort than it might for someone else, and even if it takes longer, then it is wrong for the government to step in and guarantee a free college education for everyone.
There is no end to human needs in a way. I “need” a college education for free is not really a need. It is a want, a desire. It is often difficult for people to distinguish between “needs” and “wants”. It is easy for people to become corrupted and insist that others provide for me more and more, based on my subjective judgment that I “need” what someone else can pay for.
The “social encyclicals” say a lot more than that, but enough already.
You censored the Holy Father’s right to free speech - kudos for capitalism! The Church has had 2000 years of experience, it would behoove one take advantage on what is actually taught, rather than display ignorance.
““Pope denounces profit-at-all mentality behind economic crisis hitting Europe”
I don’t think he’s pegged the cause of Europe’s woes.”
The Pope has been VERY clear about the basis of Europe’s woes. He and the previous Pope made clarion calls for those who were establishing the European Union to make sure that they paid tribute to the role of Christianity that initially led to their betterment.
Both spoke clearly and often of the dangers of secularization for Europe.
The Popes were ignored.
With regard to economics, it is not that man should not strive, for he who will not work shall not eat, but that the means to an end will often escape him, and he must try to see in perfect clarity the ways things really are, and trust that the Lord will provide.
Ping!
Jesus said man does not live by bread alone, but by every word from the mouth of God. This affirms that a productive economy is necessary to live, but is not sufficient to live well.
“Liberty” in capitalist societies means the power to do what one wants,...
I understand this conflicts with the Catholic definition of liberty, which is the freedom to do what it correct. But, this is not the classical liberal definition of liberty, which is to be free from arbitrary force.
The distinction is important because the corrupt definition of liberty criticized by the Pope (the power to do what one wants) means that enslaving others, stealing from them, or taxing and regulating them through the state are potentially legitimate. They give you the power to do what you want.
But, money isn’t freedom. It’s the opportunity to make money that is true freedom. When your problem is how to make money, you have to weight the benefit and the cost. As long as the government protects the rights and property of others, making money means you have to serve others in order to serve yourself.
Now, it would be better to see this, to appreciate that making money serves others. It would also be good if the things our customers want, and the things we want ourselves, are good, and not degrading of our humanity. Hence, religion uplifts us as producers and consumers, to demand and supply good things to each other.
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.