POPE FRANCIS ATTACKS CAPITALISM, CALLS FOR STATE CONTROL

Breitbart ^ | 27 Nov 2013, | WILLIAM BIGELOW

[navysealdad]

In a far-ranging 50,000 word statement released by Pope Francis on Tuesday, he illustrated that he is sympathetic to the tenets of liberation theology and hostile to capitalism.

[Gene Eric]

>> Let’s face it, the man is a Fascist.

Fascists favor the alliance between oppressive govt and its crony capitalists — not the capitalism Reagan stood for.

[dragonblustar]

It’s so weird to have the complete opposite of Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul. Now it’s Obama, Francis, and Cameron.

[Greysard]

it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality

His good intentions are clear; however you can't go out, rob a bank and give the stolen money out to the poor and needy. Solutions should make sense.

In this case we all, as the society, are facing a serious problem: employees are not needed anymore. A thousand years ago every able worker could find work because the human labor was not very productive. If all you can do is manually plant seeds, the farmer needs hundreds and hundreds of workers to do *anything* on his land. He would pay very little for this work, since he, in turn, would also gain very little from this work.

Today the farmer does not need to hire crowds of workers. (Well, some cultures still require them. But this is just an example.) Today one person can work a huge field; he is very efficient. In cities robots assemble cars, computers, and other products. Most of what we see around us is assembled by robots. Some products cannot even be assembled by hand (electronic components, as an example.) We do not need millions of ditch diggers anymore. We need scientists, engineers, programmers, technologists, doctors, writers. But those avenues are closed to many people. It takes effort and some talent to study complex math; it takes very good memory to remember all the bones and all the muscles and all the nerves in the human body; it takes fertile imagination to write an interesting book or to produce an entertaining movie. It is hard enough to learn when you are young; it is ten times as hard when you are 50 years old and have bills to pay. This transition is not just difficult; it's plain impossible (unless you are a hidden genius - I knew at least one such guy.)

This means that automation and ever-growing efficiency of manufacturing are eliminating the need for simple manual labor. 50 years ago a worker would be making a crude gear on a lathe or on a specialized milling machine, and he'd spend a day doing it. Today one worker only monitors ten computer-controlled machining centers, and his only job is to load materials and tools, and remove finished parts. To make things worse, this machining cannot be done by hand anymore. Nine machinists are looking for a job now. Will they find it? Only if they become MasterCAM programmers, or mechanical engineers, or technologists, or designers. Even then we'd be wondering if we need so many engineers: 100 developers at Apple made 100 million iPhones happen. This is a huge step outside of "cell phone makers' guild," where each master would need a month to make one phone.

All this has nothing to do with Capitalism, of course. Socialism only offers a make-work solution. Communism offers no solutions in principle; in a Communist society people do not work at all, or they do whatever they care to do. (That would be the Knockout Kings game, because lazy people do not become smarter.) There are no jobs simply because nobody needs the low level labor anymore (approximately, of course; construction, port workers, transportation still require some manual labor. But the age of coolies is gone.)

The Bishop of Rome sees this problem, as he should - but he does not look deeper, he is not talking about the social causes. He should. Humankind went through several social revolutions already, and another one is not far in the future. He cannot make bad things disappear just by wishing them away. I would like to read his serious analysis of processes in the modern society, starting with the rapid growth of the class of the privileged, entitled poor. Unfortunately, more and more often I see opinions that simply propose to feed unemployed. This is not going to work, for many obvious reasons (such as it doesn't work already.) If the Pope wants a challenge, here it is: propose a specific plan how we can change the society to eliminate poverty and to provide everyone with a satisfying, but not back-breaking job. How to stop bored ghetto kids from committing senseless crimes. How to convince people to not use drugs. How to be honest. I do not see a way to survive the upcoming social crisis without making humans better. If humans don't improve, they are bound to kill each other, again. Worse still, it will be the bad part of the society that dominates and kills the good part - as it is happening already.

[Gene Eric]

>> At least the intentions are good.

Arguably, there’s nothing wrong with making demands providing the demands are not enforceable. This is what free speech is about. On the hand, when the govt does it with an iron fist and boot on one’s throat, it’s tyranny.

As far as “Liberalism”, it hasn’t proven to help anyone. To the contrary, it’s destroyed families, communities, and cities. Do the Jesuits preach in this vain, or is their message more about selfless charity that is beyond reasonable?

[Mr Rogers]

You bring up a serious problem, and one that I don’t have the answer to. If someone doesn’t have natural abilities - and many do not - then what do they do in a modern society? What do unskilled laborers do in a society that has no need for unskilled laborers?

If I knew, I’d run for President...

[Gene Eric]

Thanks, Salvation.

I suspect the controversial text is related to the following:

In relation to the challenges of the contemporary world, the Pope denounces the current economic system as “unjust at its root”. “Such an economy kills” because the law of “the survival of the fittest” prevails. The current culture of the “disposable” has created “something new”: “the excluded are not the ‘exploited’ but the outcast, the ‘leftovers’”. “A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual”, of an “autonomy of the market” in which “financial speculation” and “widespread corruption” and “self-serving tax-evasion reign”.

Tax evasion is of course illegal and wrong -- the evasion becomes the burden to others. But I'm still curious about the intended message.

[familyop]

"In this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market,...We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the invisible hand of the market. Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income,..."

I disagree with his arguments for more socialism and environmentalism against capitalism. The main problem is that of too many anti-competition regulations against low income folks building for ourselves and starting small production businesses. More socialist laws for environmentalism against new competition and for redistributing wealth would make the problem worse during this time, when starting a small manufacturing shop is effectively illegal in most of the U.S.A. (e.g., zoning laws against new, small manufacturing shops in sparsely populated rural areas).

[familyop]

The link for that quoted excerpt.

[ladyjane]

While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few.

He must be reading the Huffington Post.

He should go into the Vatican library and read about the olden days when the Church and royalty controlled 99% of the wealth while the peasants starved and the heretics were burned at the stake.

If he's really concerned about the poor he could start tithing like a good Christian.

[windcliff]

bump

[pieceofthepuzzle]

“How much do you think the Vatican is worth? Maybe he should sell it off and redistribute it to the worlds poor??”

A relevant point for all who would point out the splinter in the capitalists eye, while ignoring the plank in their own. I am very sad tonight.

[familyop]

I’ve analyzed several products (markets, expenses, prices, etc.) that could be made with cheap machines in a small shop and would provide great profits for an individual machinist. But it’s against the law to do so (zoning against any and all manufacturing), even on a large piece of private, cheap land in the middle of nowhere (here—very few people in the County). Going into hock for extremely expensive equipment is not always the best way, and paying flooring cost to some crook with an industrial park is a nearly universally known no-go.

Automation is not the problem, but regulations against uppity domestic competition from truly conservative slaves is part of the problem (not to mention the family-busting divorce/cohabitation paradigm in law and social politics). There are also environmentalist and animal-worship fronts used as anti-competition measures with the help of local governments. And yes, there are monopoly interests behind at least some of those fronts.

[Salvation]

Thanks.

[Salvation]

Bump on your Venezuela thought!

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3096201/posts

Read what it really says. Don’t believe the lamestream media.

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3096201/posts

Read what it really says. Don’t believe the lamestream media.

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3096201/posts

Read what it really says. Don’t believe the lamestream media.

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3096201/posts

Read what it really says. Don’t believe the lamestream media.

[Mr Rogers]

“One thing that strikes me as I read, more than anything else, is the huge departure in depth and scholarship from Francis’ two predecessors -Sort of disappointing.”

I’ve concluded Francis just isn’t very smart.

“By elevating feeling over thought, by making compassion the measure of all things, the Pope was able to evade the complexities of the situation, in effect indulging in one of the characteristic vices of our time, moral exhibitionism, which is the espousal of generous sentiment without the pain of having to think of the costs to other people of the implied (but unstated) morally-appropriate policy. This imprecision allowed him to evade the vexed question as to exactly how many of the suffering of Africa, and elsewhere, Europe was supposed to admit and subsidize (and by Europe I mean, of course, the European taxpayer, who might have problems of his own).”

http://www.libertylawsite.org/2013/07/22/pope-francis-should-seek-clarity-on-moral-responsibility/#.Uf9c7sOZVPM.twitter

[mikrofon]

“...some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.”

I'd also question the accuracy of the translation and need to consider the context within his larger point of course, but this quote bothered me ... particularly the use of preferred Media catch-phrasing ("trickle-down"); statement of an "absolute" that is patently false (the freer the marketplace --not crony corporatism-- the greater the level of economic justice & opportunity); and, it seems to posit a cynical & frankly un-Christian attitude toward wealthier individuals and business owners that their motives and "goodness" should be suspect. A "crude and naïve trust" in the goodness of those wielding Government power can be even worse.

The simple matter of faith to the Gospel and evangelism of the Church shouldn't be conflated with adherence to economic systems.