If you want a lesson on why socialism is winning
over capitalism, look no further than Stephanie Slade’s allegedly
pro-capitalist Reason.com article “Regulation
and ‘the Right Ordering of Economic Life’: What libertarians can learn from Catholic social doctrine.”
Since the first papal encyclical on modern economic questions,
Rerum Novarum, was promulgated in 1891, Catholic pontiffs have had harsh words
for "unbridled capitalism" and "philosophical liberalism."
In Quadragesimo Anno (1931), Pope Pius XI wrote that "the right ordering
of economic life cannot be left to a free competition of forces. For from this
source, as from a poisoned spring, have originated and spread all the errors of
individualist economic teaching." In Octogesima Adveniens (1971), Pope
Paul VI argued that "structures" should be set up "in which the
rhythm of progress would be regulated with a view to greater justice."
The upshot—that a capitalist system cannot be trusted
automatically to produce what the Church views as morally acceptable
outcomes—may seem to require Christians to support a robust central government.
If society is to be oriented to the common good, surely some person or body
needs to have enough power to do the orienting. What, besides the state, can
regulate the market?
Slade’s “upshot” seems spot-on. Evading her own
observation, she goes on to quote Pope John Paul II’s admonition to auto
manufacturers of their “ethical” obligation of “promoting the full human
development of millions of men and women” as proof of
The Church's surprising lesson for partisans of big government is
that the best tools for correctly ordering economic life are found in the
choices of individual market actors.
Obviously, the auto industry’s massive
enhancement of millions of lives through its production of cars and jobs is not
what the Pope had in mind. It’s a massive act of evasion for Slade to quote
Paul VI, of all Catholic authorities, to support her contention. As I’ve noted
in my Objective Standard article, Paul VI is an unabashed advocate of an unlimited authoritarian
state, with “individual market actors” acting only as extensions of government
authority.
The fact is, Catholic doctrine is socialist and
statist. The Church openly advocates political power to impose its social
doctrine. In Populorum Progressio, Pope Paul VI himself laid it out in plain
language:
“‘[U]nder the leadership of justice and in the company of charity,
created goods should flow fairly to all.’
“All other rights, whatever they may be, including the rights of
property and free trade, are to be subordinated to this principle. [22]
“[T]the right of private property may never be exercised to the
detriment of the common good. . . When ‘private gain and basic community
needs conflict with one another,’ it is for the public authorities ‘to seek a
solution to these questions, with the active involvement of individual citizens
and social groups.’ [23]
“Organized programs are necessary for ‘directing, stimulating,
coordinating, supplying and integrating’ the work of individuals and
intermediary organizations.
“It is for the public authorities to establish and lay down the
desired goals, the plans to be followed, and the methods to be used in
fulfilling them; and it is also their task to stimulate the efforts of those
involved in this common activity.” [33]
The “public authorities”--the state--would
subordinate “all other rights”—that is, all genuine individual rights—to carry
out the Church’s ironclad mandate that “created goods should flow fairly to
all.” And in his 2009 Encyclical Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI
reaffirmed the message of Populorum Progressio, calling it “still timely in our
day.” That is not the Church saying “the best tools for correctly ordering
economic life are found in the choices of individual market actors.” It is not
government as a “backstop.” That is the Church calling for a totalitarian
socialist state.
There is so much wrong in the way this article
portrays social relationships under “unregulated liberal capitalism” that it
could have been written by a committed socialist. Slade effectively swallows
the socialists’ straw man version of capitalism and self-interest, including
the false idea that capitalism is about “all involved are concerned solely with
their own material advantage and will happily sacrifice others in the pursuit
thereof,” which is the opposite of how free markets work, which is trade. Trade
is the mutual, non-sacrificial exchange of value for value. The Church is so
hooked on self-sacrifice that it can’t see any alternative but other-sacrifice:
It can’t conceive of non-sacrificial, mutually beneficial, mutually selfish
trade relationships.
And so Christian apologists try to box
capitalism into a sacrificial—that is, altruistic—straightjacket. It won’t
work. It never has. And the Catholic Church knows it. Catholic social doctrine
is virulently anti-capitalist, and as Slade shows by the very quotes she cites,
Catholic social doctrine condemns the moral core of capitalism--the right to
the pursuit of personal gain and happiness through trade. If you can’t defend
capitalism morally, you can’t defend capitalism.
The essence of Catholic social doctrine is that
need trumps individualism—that is, it’s collectivist. And it’s clear that the
Catholic Church views “big government”—statism—as the ultimate source of the
“structures” that would determine “the right ordering of economic life.” No wonder
Catholic doctrine condemns self-interest. It’s the same reason the socialists
do—to kill capitalism and bring on socialism. What is left of the individual
and private enterprise whose property rights have been subordinated to a
state-determined “common good?”
As I stated earlier, Catholic social doctrine is
socialist. That’s not news. But it is not voluntary socialism. It is political
socialism, socialism imposed by state force, Marxism/Leninism socialism. Slade
seems to be a sincere advocate of individual liberty. In another article, she
condemns who she calls “the New
Theocrats,” a rising Conservative
New Right who advocate for “the use of the public power [of the state] to
advance the common good, including in the realm of public morality” based on
Catholic doctrine. They seek “to use the law to forcibly restore America's
Judeo-Christian character” as a counter-attack against the New Left’s
anti-liberty, “common good” agenda. Slade correctly calls out these New
Theocrats for their use of the “common good” justification. “The problem hardly
needs stating: What is meant by the common good?”, she asks. Yet Paul VI
himself justifies the Church’s statist position in the same way, saying “[T]the
right of private property may never be exercised to the detriment of the common
good.”
She may not like it, but the Cathoilc Church
backs up the New Theocrats, not Stephanie Slade.
Related Reading:
The
Illegitimacy of Pope Francis's “Legitimate Redistribution” of Wealth—Natalie Ogle for The Objective Standard
