Posted on 07/08/2009 7:07:40 AM PDT by marshmallow
No it's not.
It's simply a restatement of what numerous Christians espouse every week and sometimes every day when they go to Church; namely to place the interests of others before their own. To place neighbor before self.
We do so voluntarily.
If we voluntarily place the common good above our own selfishness, how is that opposed to personal freedom?
The Pope's encyclical is simply a plea for Christian principles in the market place. Nothing more. That's a rude wake up call for too many people who compartmentalize their lives. We nod and say "aye" happily when we hear the Sunday Gospel proclaim that "the love of money is the root of all evil", then on Monday we go out and try to make a killing.
* the role of a "largely speculative" approach to finance in precipitating the current worldwide economic crisis;
Financing - by its very nature - is speculative. What is broken is not the speculative model; what is broken is the downside of speculation. In the name of "too big to fail" and other bailouts, we have eliminated the risk that accompanies speculation. With the risk gone, there is no internal regulation on speculation.
In our attempt to protect people, we have broken the very thing that should teach them how to protect themselves - self-preservation. In this case, we are giving the man a fish rather than teaching him how to fish, which is a decidedly NON-Christian attitude to take. We are to equip our brothers in all things, and protect those who cannot protect themselves. Rather, we are trying to protect everyone regardless of their own God-given abilities.
* the failure of world leaders to cope with the phenomenon of migration-- which is often provoked by intolerable situations in undeveloped countries, and aggravated by the failure of host nations to protect the dignity of immigrants;
There should be no protection of dignity for illegal immigration, and I know of very little issues with legal immigration (at least among the capitalist, free market nations).
Or can I immigrate (i.e.: pick up, move my items, then squat down) to the Vatican without worry? The pope will welcome me to pitch my tent on the grass outside St. Peter's and to live as I want? After all, he is now the head of a sovereign nation. What is the Vatican policy on immigration, or is this a case of the speck in your brother's eye, rather than your own plank?
* the "unregulated exploitation of earth's resources;"
Which is a result of the failure to teach self-preservation and promote capitalism (which inherently opposes a massive, single/central Government - see Milton Friedman's classic Capitalism and Freedom for more details about this). The socialist/central approach - a single, overriding authority - is what causes exploitation in that one's own life is not for one to decide. Your local environment is not for you to worry about, but for the Government.
The solution is not a world-wide authority; the solution is to give the people direct authority over their own area. Where capitalism flourishes, money follows, and the environment improves. Travel from Singapore to Kuala Lumpur - just a day's bus ride apart. You'll find Singapore infinitely more clean and modern. And you'll find that Singapore has centuries more history of being a free, capitalist nation where the rights of the invididual are protected.
The solution to solving the environment is not world-Government; the solution is to give every man his freedom, economically and politically. When a man has enough money to no longer worry about eating his next meal, he will instinctually begin cleaning and bettering his own environs.
* the importance of understanding that rights are always attached to corresponding duties;
Which he completely ignores in his dealing with speculation, or with the environment.
* the wrongful exploitation of international aid, which "has often been diverted from its proper ends;"
Only that aid which is Government-to-Government. Having been on a dozen missions trips (usually medical in nature) I can attest that money and resources given person-to-person get to where they need to go.
The solution here is not another Government, or an intra-Governmental agency; the solution is to get Governments out of the way and let man help fellow man directly. The world is AMAZINGLY small now - you can be anywhere you want within 24 hours, and usually for under $1500. For those who want to practice what they preach, the success of individual capitalism has given us the technology of air travel to do so affordably and easily.
* an "excessive zeal" for maintaining intellectual-property rights in the developed countries, thus suppressing opportunities for growth in the developing countries;
Because the output of the scientist, or artist, or other inventor is not to be as valued as the output of a mechanic or farm laborer? Who has fed more people: my cousin running a farm outside of Lewiston, Idaho, or the lead chemist at Montesano?
If the inventor wants to feed the world, or help the world with his invention, it is the capitalist system and the fundamental understanding of the rights of the individual to self-determination which guarantees the inventor can share his invention with the world at the price he believes is worthy. There is no law that you must set a single, world-wide price for your invention; give it away to some, charge others.
It is when Governments decide to ignore the rights of the inventor that the system breaks down. Suddenly the inventor must look to protect what he can, where he can. Government does not help in this case, it hinders.
* the anti-life approach that has infected the most advanced countries, producing a society that "ends up no longer finding the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man’s true good;
Yes, the social net folks. Pope Benedict XVI, please sit down with the Catholic leaders in Congress (starting with Nancy Pelosi) and get your flock under control. Or make a formal proclamation about their status as non-Catholics. Because right now your own flock is doing the damage here, and in much of Europe, too. Matthew 7:5 applies here really well...
* the importance of allowing the Christian faith to exert some moral guiding force, which can occur "only if God has a place in the public realm."
Governments have a history of repressing religion; it is the first thing to go since religion is one of the big forces in most people's lives that calls for allegiance beyond the State. Adding another world-wide intra-Governmental body will not stop that, for it will necessarily have to deem all religions equal, and thus recognize none. And end up with the atheists once again getting religion pushed out of everything in the name of "fairness".
This encyclical - as I am reading it, this summary from Catholic radio seems pretty fair - is proof positive that a pope is fallible, and contrary to Pius XII this encyclical should NOT end debate about the very nature of capitalism, individual self-determination, and freedom of the individual.
the failure of world leaders to cope with the phenomenon of migration -- which is often provoked by intolerable situations in undeveloped countries
Consider the US and Mexico immigration issues: Where is the source of the problem? Mexico. If you have ever been to Mexico you know it is a vast country blessed with tremendous resources including petroleum wealth. The Mexicans that come here, for the most part, are hard working so it is not the people. So why do they come here? They have a corrupt crony government that has suppressed industrial and economic development. Think about it. Most everything sold in Wal-Mart is made by cheap labor in China. If it was made in factories in Mexico the transportation costs would be a fraction. They could undercut the Chinese while still earning greater profit at higher wages. So what happens instead? The Mexican government comes here to complain about our immigration laws instead of the US complaining about their anti-business laws. There is a failure to recognize that the migration issue was provoked by the intolerable conditions in Mexico.
and aggravated by the failure of host nations to protect the dignity of immigrants;
I would agree with the Pope there also. The US has failed to enforce border control and mostly turned a blind eye towards unscrupulous employers using migrants as cheap labor. In doing so, the government has failed to protect the migrants as well as its own people. This has aggravated the problem.
It has come up here enough on Free Republic that the Vatican recognizes a country's right to enforce immigration laws to protect its sovereignty. To claim otherwise is a repetition of a false anti-Catholic claim. However, if migration is permitted the human dignity of those who migrate should be respected. This does not mean they must be placed on welfare and provided government largess. It means they should be treated fairly. Whether a northeast WASP or Mexican farm worker, we are all created in God's image. That is not a call to violate sovereign law.
However, when he writes that, "By considering reciprocity as the heart of what it is to be a human being, subsidiarity is the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state", I would say that the present establishment of global economics shows us that subsidiarity, while admirable and goal-worthy of every person, cannot withstand the forces of secularism which, for the most part, holds that the acquisition of profit, obtained by whatever means necessary, is the ultimate purpose of human existence.
"Hence the principle of subsidiarity is particularly well-suited to managing globalization and directing it towards authentic human development. In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels that can work together. Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way[138], if it is not to infringe upon freedom and if it is to yield effective results in practice."
And who, exactly, will be in charge of directing and implementing subsidiarity in the new global government? I see this as very wishful thinking that will never come to fruition. In fact, Scripture points to a very different reality of the future of global governance: forced worship of one man on pain of death. No subsidiarity to be found.
In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. (67)
Now, I must say, this is alarming. Why does the "family of nations" need "teeth"?
I whole-heartedly agree with you on the dangers of the elimination of the risk on speculation. However, there is also a point to be made on the nature of the speculation as well. The speculation on things such as the price of corn on the commodities market used to be based on things like the weather. Now the speculation is primarily on the actions of other speculators. The market price fluctuations no longer have a correlation to what is being traded but rather that it is being traded. Reading How to Buy Stocks today is almost comical. Did the DOT.com bubble have anything to do with PE ratios, earnings outlooks or strength of management? Did the housing bubble have anything to do with supply and demand for housing? Clearly not. Speculation on the future value of the underlying asset was not the source of the pricing fluctuation. It was the speculation on the actions of other speculators that caused the bubbles and inevitable collapse.
The bottom line is that I do not think the Pope was incorrect in accusing the "largely speculative" approach as the culprit. I also believe that you correctly identified why it has become "largely speculative" and that is the elimination of risk. It would be like going to Vegas if you get to keep your winnings but the casino will cover your losses. Who wouldn't mortgage their house, sell their car and quit their job? Bottom line, that is the problem. Wall Street has become Vegas to too many. Trading trends matter more than a company's earning trends.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachNAsbU Colossians 3:22 Slaves, in all things obey those who are your mastersI'm sure you are not unfamiliar with the inspired writings of Paul
on earth, not with external service, as those who merely please men, but
with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.
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.