A Word on Socialism

Troutsky declares:

I am still prepared to argue that theoretical socialism, though it has never existed, is a preferable system on moral grounds and a likely next historical phase based on scientific reasons and am undeterred that this might be described as "utopian" thinking.

We must determine whether, in fact, socialism is a system preferable to capitalism on moral grounds. We must then determine whether an ideal system should be judged based on the theorized good it purports to bring or rather based on its fruit, even in a bastardized form.

First, is Socialism morally preferable? My morals are drawn from the Roman Catholic Church, which draws from both the Scriptures as well as Tradition. We go to the former first. In Acts 4:32, we read, “The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.” This is taken as a nod to socialism as the favored form of government of the early church. Yet the next few verses are necessary for proper perspective.

“There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.” (Acts 4:35 and 36) The church did hold things in common, but the choice of what to sell was left to the individual believers, with the task of distribution falling to the disciples. Marx summarizes his economic philosophy as the abolition of private property. This is altogether different from that of the early church. If property was simply to be abolished, Peter would have seized everything and sold it himself. He did not. Willful participation is crucial to those who belong to the Kingdom. Further, this was done without the involvement of the government, and is far more akin to the distributism advocated by Belloc, Chesterton and others.

Since humans, being subjective creatures, are prone to pick and choose what they like best from Scripture, the Catholic Church vociferously defends the faith, and at times the Pope issues encyclicals to promulgate Catholic thought.

As a brief aside, the Church is often maligned for being behind the times. Those who prescribe to this nonsense would be surprised to learn the date of the famous encyclical, Rerum Novarum, On Capital and Labor: 1891. Those darn Catholics and being behind the times. But I digress.

Pope Leo XIII observes:

[S]ocialists... are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

The Vicar of Christ on earth not only utters the common criticism, namely that socialism is untenable, but, in fact, that it is unjust. He then explains why:

It is surely undeniable that, when a man engages in remunerative labor, the impelling reason and motive of his work is to obtain property, and thereafter to hold it as his very own... Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life.

What is of far greater moment, however, is the fact that the remedy they propose is manifestly against justice. For, every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own. This is one of the chief points of distinction between man and the animal creation... One of these instincts is self preservation, the other the propagation of the species. Both can attain their purpose by means of things which lie within range; beyond their verge the brute creation cannot go, for they are moved to action by their senses only, and in the special direction which these suggest... And on this very account - that man alone among the animal creation is endowed with reason - it must be within his right to possess things not merely for temporary and momentary use, as other living things do, but to have and to hold them in stable and permanent possession; he must have not only things that perish in the use, but those also which, though they have been reduced into use, continue for further use in after time.

I cannot but feel a bit ashamed at having to extract mere excerpts from what is a beautiful letter through and through, and an example of liberal, in the classic sense, Catholic thought. For the Pope then goes on to explain errors of capitalism, that, though not remediable by socialism, are yet to be corrected within the same system.

Now, we do not need to examine socialism's failings in practice since it has already been deemed insufficient in theory, at least to the Catholic, and hopefully to the Christian, who, though he might reject papal authority on all doctrinal matters, might still yield to good sense. It should be noted that the inability for socialism to reach fruition might be due, not to bad luck or poor circumstances, but bad theory in and of itself. To draw an analogy, I have designed many a play in my amateur career as a backyard quarterback. Some have been deemed, by yours truly, as worthy of the mind of Lombardi himself. And though it is possible that my brother's inability to seal the corner or adequately sell the fake bear the blame, it is perhaps more likely that my play-making prowess is more akin to Dennis Green than to the Packer legend.

Most important though, for the moment, is the issue of justice. If the Pope is mistaken, I have no doubt that Troutsky will alert me to his error. If his judgment is sound, we must think up and work on alternatives to socialism—such as distributism—which are not only more practical and implementable, but emphatically just. Until then, the inbred step-child of the free market will be tolerated, and improved where possible. The Christian should rest easy, for though things may be dire on this earth, a perfect and eternal system awaits those who put their faith, not in men or markets, but in Christ.