Distributism

[bdouglass]

I want to know who claims to be living under a distributist system? Where do you live?


The problem with the "show me distributism working" question is that no state has really ever implimented it. The High Middle Ages followed a system that is very similar, however, it wasn't intentionally distributist and there were still some flaws in the system which Belloc and others worked out in their theory (like the impact of technology). I would call that proto-distributist, though.

We can, however, look at companies and organizations which operate on the distributist model.

The Catholic Worker Movement (at least originally) was distributist. Catholic worker farms were supposed to be agricultural universities. I think the movement was/is a success where it remained orthodox.

The Guild of St. Jospeh and Dominic in Ditchling, England lasted from 1907 until 1989 and was quite fruitful operating on the distributist model.

Small is Still Beautiful: Economics as if Families Mattered by Joseph Pearce shows some examples of distributism in practice. I remember a chapter about breweries. I don't have the book with me in the UK, so sorry I can't be more specific.

I think the best example of the distributist model even working in an industrial setting is the Mondragón Cooperative Corporation in Spain. [url="http://www.mcc.es/"]http://www.mcc.es/[/url] They are the 7th largest corporation in Spain and also have a university. MCC was inspired by a priest who took the Church's Social teaching as a starting point.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1449862' date='Jan 23 2008, 11:28 PM'][snip]

And when most people say "Communism," they are referring to Soviet-based Marxist-Leninist Communism, a thoroughly godless system which has been responsible for more murders and attrocities in its 90+ years of existence than any other system of government in the world.

[snip][/quote]

*cough* *cough*

Crunch the numbers against communism against the Mao regime of China.

*sniff*

[Dismas]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1450265' date='Jan 24 2008, 06:52 PM']*cough* *cough*

Crunch the numbers against communism against the Mao regime of China.

*sniff*[/quote]
Mao didn't have a Ukraine to starve.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1450265' date='Jan 24 2008, 07:52 PM']*cough* *cough*

Crunch the numbers against communism against the Mao regime of China.

*sniff*[/quote]
The Mao regime was Communist.

[Dismas]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1450325' date='Jan 24 2008, 09:00 PM']The Mao regime was Communist.[/quote]
In fact, Mao is viewed by some as a more "pure" Communist than Stalin.

As for my perspective:
Begin with a Laissez-faire Capitalism. Hold a hard line to the gold standard in regards to monetary policy, establish an independent banking system, enforce strict usury and fraud laws, etc. And no, Laissez-faire Capitalism is not immoral, but rather amoral.

From there, the socially conscious Catholic is free to use his wealth and property as he sees fit, including establishing a "sub-economy" nested within the greater economic framework of Laissez-faire Capitalism. This limits the abusiveness of central planning by balancing it with volunteer activity.

[goldenchild17]

snap this was an old thread... I still believe distributism is the best possible model and no I don't currently no much more about economics than I did and no I don't think it wrong to present defenses for something even if I don't understand it fully. That said, I was a jerk and hopefully I've been able to improve on my tone and apparently thin skin since this thread first got started. peace

Edited January 26, 2008 by goldenchild17

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1449956' date='Jan 24 2008, 04:46 AM']This is a tough thread.. I want to root for Socrates but I also want to root for goldenchild... I'll root for whoever is due for a post.

goldenchild: w0000t! I'm wooting for you dude! Post, post, post![/quote]

haha. appreciate it bro, but I'm afraid I'm no competition for Soc at this point. I still have a lot of reading to do... Not really sure where to go from here after such a hiatus from this thread. Though I'd be glad to start it up again if the interest is there. If only for a learning experience as I'm sure I can't provide much of a convincing defense right yet.

Edited January 26, 2008 by goldenchild17

[bdouglass]

I was informed about the Democratic Labor Party of Austrailia as an example of a distributist party in real life. Anyone know much about them. [url="http://www.dlp.org.au/"]http://www.dlp.org.au/[/url]

Something similar might work in the US. It would be interesting, at least. Something to work for along with my distributist village.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1449958' date='Jan 24 2008, 07:32 AM']But weren't a lot of people technically communists that had no choice in the matter?

(Curious... again, this isn't my topic so I'm always willing to learn.)[/quote]
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you mean people drafted into Communist armies, or forced to work for Communist governments?

Obviously, people are not morally responsible for what they were forced into against their wills - just as young Joseph Ratzinger was not morally responsible for being forced to join the Hitler Youth.
However, such cases do nothing to diminish the evil of the Communist ideology.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1451602' date='Jan 27 2008, 05:57 PM']I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you mean people drafted into Communist armies, or forced to work for Communist governments?

Obviously, people are not morally responsible for what they were forced into against their wills - just as young Joseph Ratzinger was not morally responsible for being forced to join the Hitler Youth.
However, such cases do nothing to diminish the evil of the Communist ideology.[/quote]
Man of the hour!!

[Didacus]

[quote name='Dismas' date='24 January 2008 - 08:53 PM' timestamp='1201226031' post='1450321']
Mao didn't have a Ukraine to starve.
[/quote]

They didn't need it. The mao regime killed more people than Stalin.

And yes, Mao was communist as well.

*back to you Bob*

[King's Rook's Pawn]

This thread...

[img]http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/green12-zombie-hand-0409-10162228.jpg[/img]

...just won't stay dead.

[Winchester]

If we have no government, everyone will magically behave. Commercial entities will not gain and then abuse power, strong men will not subjugate the weak through force and everyone--everyone--will have a PS3.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Winchester' date='04 January 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1262631134' post='2029527']
If we have no government, everyone will magically behave. Commercial entities will not gain and then abuse power, strong men will not subjugate the weak through force and everyone--everyone--will have a PS3.
[/quote]
I want a PS3.


But srsly, old thread! I remember it well. Where is Aloysius when u need him?

[mommas_boy]

My question on distributism: what's to prevent the acquisition mentality of modern corporatism?

[Aloysius]

laws which define property as something which must be locally owned and truly possessed by its owner pretty effectively deny the possibility of the acquisition mindset, because one can only get into that acquisition mindset if it is possible to own merely by the power of transferring capital and thus be able to endlessly acquire more and more.

just as pretty much all the money in the world wouldn't make it possible for a Chinese Business man to buy the Statue of Liberty, all the money in the world shouldn't be enough for the Chinese business man who lives in China to buy a single acre of US soil or for an American business man to buy a single acre of Chinese soil... apply this principle down to local territory levels, and you effectively end the ability to amass large empires of property to make others dependent upon you, and the acquisition mentality cannot take hold because one cannot acquire in that way.

people who own things in one city have to work together with people that own things in another city to spread their business, they cannot just open up shop themselves in that city since they don't live there.

it's a limit on property ownership that I believe is perfectly consistent with the natural law: since man cannot be omnipresent, his property cannot be either.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Aloysius

[Socrates]

[quote name='mommas_boy' date='05 January 2010 - 12:42 AM' timestamp='1262670154' post='2030043']
My question on distributism: what's to prevent the acquisition mentality of modern corporatism?
[/quote]
Government force.
Worked great in the Soviet Union.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Socrates' date='05 January 2010 - 02:53 PM' timestamp='1262721186' post='2030297']
Government force.
Worked great in the Soviet Union.
[/quote]

would you say the U.S. is like the Soviet Union in using government force to prevent or punish identity theft?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didymus' date='07 January 2010 - 09:46 AM' timestamp='1262875573' post='2031724']
would you say the U.S. is like the Soviet Union in using government force to prevent or punish identity theft?
[/quote]
?

Where did I say anything about punishing theft?
I was talking about government force to prevent legal, non-fraudulent, mutually-agreed-on transactions between buyer and seller.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Socrates' date='07 January 2010 - 01:47 PM' timestamp='1262890062' post='2031828']
?

Where did I say anything about punishing theft?
I was talking about government force to prevent legal, non-fraudulent, mutually-agreed-on transactions between buyer and seller.
[/quote]

I didn't claim you said anything, I was only asking the question.

legal, non-fraudulent, mutually-agreed-on transactions between a buyer and a seller do not merit good in and of itself.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Didymus