Which is better for society: Capitalism or Communism?

[universalist]

Maybe if we as a nation would show as much interest in creating livable wage jobs,feeding the hungry,free health insurance,etc as we do in building up our war machine we would have money for the good of the poor and working class,the money spent on illegal wars and killing machinery is sickening to me as an American and Christian. In Chrst

[estesbob]

Originally Posted by universalist

Maybe if we as a nation would show as much interest in creating livable wage jobs,feeding the hungry,free health insurance,etc as we do in building up our war machine we would have money for the good of the poor and working class,the money spent on illegal wars and killing machinery is sickening to me as an American and Christian. In Chrst

America is the most generous country in the world. I have been in mexico the last two weeks where they supposedly have all the things you mention above-thay also have something you dont see in the US-slums. The poor in the Untied States live better than the midle class here.

The reason that the US is so prosperous and generous is because we have a militray to protect us.

[Peccavi]

Originally Posted by royal archer

Being middle class and reading this I feel I have a duty to do what I can but I do not see license in this to go and sieze the wealth of rich to give it to the poor.

There is no Gospel imperative to do that. Salvation is entirely personal. What must I do to be saved, not what must society do. But in the epistle of Saint James there is an implicit sense that within a Christian community there should be no economic winners or loosers but a common wealth shared equally. This has interesting implications for us as Christians.
Note - Luther refused to include the Epistle of St.James in his studies because of its egalitarian message. In fact he considered it dross.

[rmcbride77]

Originally Posted by Dempsey1919

I do not vote, and I have never voted. A lot of people say I am stupid for not exercising my democratic rights, but I don't think so. The reason I don't vote is because I don't really have any strong political beliefs, and I don't subscribe to any political ideology. I won't vote until I know what I'm voting for. I make all of my decisions based on the teachings of the Catholic Church. I am completely ignorant when it comes to politics and government.

I know that there is Communism on the left, democracy in the centre, and fascism on the right. I also know that democratic governments can be slightly to the left, or slightly to the right. Political parties can be classed as socialist, or capitalist, left or right. It seems to me that politics is basically capitalism v socialism. I want to know which is better for society: Capitalism or Socialism?

The USA has always been a capitalist stronghold. America seems to despise communism and socialism. Why is this? My country (UK) and Canada seem to be more friendly towards socialism, as we both have free, national healthcare and other socialist policies. What is better for society? Total capitalism, or a society which has some socialist policies?

As a Catholic, I use the teachings of the Church to help me make important decisions. I want to vote according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. With this in mind, should a Catholic vote for socialist government or capitalist government? Which political ideology shares most in common with the doctrines of the faith?

I tend to think that socialism is more in line with Catholic teaching, because these governments provide free healthcare to the poor, welfare to the unemployed, and welfare to the disabled. Socialist governments look after the workers by nationalising industries. In comparison, capitalism appears to be cold and callous. It enables the rich to exploit the poor. Within capitalism, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. Is this a fair assessment?

I want my vote to help the poor, the weak, the old, and the vulnerable. I want to make Church social teaching become a reality. Should I be a capitalist or a communist?

Which is better for a society: Capitalism or Communism?

I am with you on this one

I try to vote for the candidate or party that takes care of the worker, the poor, the middle class and has policies that take care of the disabled and all those that fall through the cracks.
My wife and I both call ourselves socialists, though I don't think we are pure socialists. I think we, like the UK, think that having some socialist programs and policies makes a better form of government. I think socialism more closely follows the teachings of Christ and His Church

thanks for posting this

Ron

[rmcbride77]

Originally Posted by estesbob

Communism has failed everytime it has been tried. Fascism, BTW, is left wing .

I don't think that is correct.

Walter Laqueur says that historical fascism "did not belong to the extreme Left, yet defining it as part of the extreme Right is not very illuminating either", but that it "was always a coalition between radical, populist ('fascist') elements and others gravitating toward the extreme Right".

Some authors such as Roger Griffin argue that since the end of World War II, fascist movements have become intertwined with the radical right, describing certain groups as part of a "fascist radical right".

Stanley Payne notes the alliances and sometimes fusion between fascists and right-wing authoritarians but stresses the important differences between the two.

One of the biggest differences between fascism and left-wing politics is that fascism rejects the idea of class conflict in favor of class collaboration, while also rejecting socialist internationalism in favor of statist nationalism. A. James Gregor argues that the most "uninspired effort to understand fascism" is to simply place it on the right-wing, or the radical right, as the common tendency was in the Anglosphere during the post-war period.

The Fascist Manifesto's initial promises included nationalization property and class conflict, but some their promises were moderated or abolished later. Many economists define "socialism" as an ideology which aims at constructing a society in which the means of production are socialized. Some argue that Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were socialist countries according to this definition. Sternhell sees fascism as anti-Marxist form of socialism.

Fascists described themselves a "third force" that was outside the traditional political spectrum altogether. Many scholars accept fascism as a search for a third way among these positions.

Sir Oswald Mosley, the leader of the British Union of Fascists, described his position as "hard centre" in the political spectrum.

Lipset sees fascism as "extremism of the center".

[StevenFrancis]

Originally Posted by Dempsey1919

I do not vote, and I have never voted. A lot of people say I am stupid for not exercising my democratic rights, but I don't think so. The reason I don't vote is because I don't really have any strong political beliefs, and I don't subscribe to any political ideology. I won't vote until I know what I'm voting for. I make all of my decisions based on the teachings of the Catholic Church. I am completely ignorant when it comes to politics and government.

I know that there is Communism on the left, democracy in the centre, and fascism on the right. I also know that democratic governments can be slightly to the left, or slightly to the right. Political parties can be classed as socialist, or capitalist, left or right. It seems to me that politics is basically capitalism v socialism. I want to know which is better for society: Capitalism or Socialism?

The USA has always been a capitalist stronghold. America seems to despise communism and socialism. Why is this? My country (UK) and Canada seem to be more friendly towards socialism, as we both have free, national healthcare and other socialist policies. What is better for society? Total capitalism, or a society which has some socialist policies?

As a Catholic, I use the teachings of the Church to help me make important decisions. I want to vote according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. With this in mind, should a Catholic vote for socialist government or capitalist government? Which political ideology shares most in common with the doctrines of the faith?

I tend to think that socialism is more in line with Catholic teaching, because these governments provide free healthcare to the poor, welfare to the unemployed, and welfare to the disabled. Socialist governments look after the workers by nationalising industries. In comparison, capitalism appears to be cold and callous. It enables the rich to exploit the poor. Within capitalism, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. Is this a fair assessment?

I want my vote to help the poor, the weak, the old, and the vulnerable. I want to make Church social teaching become a reality. Should I be a capitalist or a communist?

Which is better for a society: Capitalism or Communism?

There are deeply inherent problems for the Christian person in both of the primary economic extremes. The U.S. and Europe are currently experiencing some of the downside of capitalism. It contains no checks and balances for greed, and tends to place money above the lives of individual people. The old Soviet Union, and Maoist China experienced from their inceptions, the inherent problems with communism. A complete reliance on the state for sustinence also allows the state to impose unacceptable control over the individuals life. There is a loss of free will.

Christians are called to be IN the world, but not OF the world. Our kingdom is yet to come. We are to use the gift of democracy, (something I don't think we'll see disappear again under any economic system in the future, by the way. There will from now on be democratic socialists, and democratic capitalists, but the largest portion of the world will always be democratic from now on), to try to make clear the errors and hardness of both extremes in economic structure. A Christian should be the conscience of all geopolitical imposition. At the same time, we must obey the laws imposed by our own Governments, even as we strive to LEGALLY AND PEACEFULLY change and perfect them to the degree that the state we live in will allow. We must be good citizens under any system, but make every effort legally available to make the system more responsive to Christian love.

Above all, whether we live in a hard capitalist or hard socialist environment should be virtually irrelevant to our personal demonstration of love, charity and care for our brothers and sisters who are poor and disenfranchised, and have fallen through the cracks in either system. Our purposeful demonstration of love for God and our neighbor were the two primary commandments according to the Christ. Economies which promote greed to the point where people go unaided have problems. Economies which try to take care of everything, and by virtue of this can take care of nothing have problems.

Christians must concern themselves with the people. We're neither communists nor capitalists. We are good citizens of our born environment. Good stewards of what we are given. Above all, we are kind and generous to anyone in need.

The Church has openly criticized most economies. The Church get criticized for this seemingly wishy washy stance. But it is nonetheless valid. By adopting a Christian world view, you're perfectly justified in pointing out the errors in any economic systems, since economics is not in the primary purview of Christianity. Love, Hope and Charity are.

Personally, I THINK I would favor an economy which blends some elements of socialism with some elements of capitalism. Allowing for free and open markets for the manufacture and trade of goods and property, but having industries which are directly tied to the basics of life, regulated, or run by the state. This way capitalists can still get rich of the making and trading of goods and technology, but the state should make sure that the sick are cared for, regardless of their financial status, and that the workers in any industry are fairly treated, fed, and housed. This can be done in a variety of ways. I don't profess to have an answer. I'm not an economist, and since this type of situation doesn't currently exist anywhere that I'm aware of, I'm guessing it also has a myriad of holes and problems. Such is life. We just keep on striving, but helping others all we can in the meantime.

Peace,

Steven

[rmcbride77]

Originally Posted by StevenFrancis

There are deeply inherent problems for the Christian person in both of the primary economic extremes. The U.S. and Europe are currently experiencing some of the downside of capitalism. It contains no checks and balances for greed, and tends to place money above the lives of individual people. The old Soviet Union, and Maoist China experienced from their inceptions, the inherent problems with communism. A complete reliance on the state for sustinence also allows the state to impose unacceptable control over the individuals life. There is a loss of free will.

Christians are called to be IN the world, but not OF the world. Our kingdom is yet to come. We are to use the gift of democracy, (something I don't think we'll see disappear again under any economic system in the future, by the way. There will from now on be democratic socialists, and democratic capitalists, but the largest portion of the world will always be democratic from now on), to try to make clear the errors and hardness of both extremes in economic structure. A Christian should be the conscience of all geopolitical imposition. At the same time, we must obey the laws imposed by our own Governments, even as we strive to LEGALLY AND PEACEFULLY change and perfect them to the degree that the state we live in will allow. We must be good citizens under any system, but make every effort legally available to make the system more responsive to Christian love.

Above all, whether we live in a hard capitalist or hard socialist environment should be virtually irrelevant to our personal demonstration of love, charity and care for our brothers and sisters who are poor and disenfranchised, and have fallen through the cracks in either system. Our purposeful demonstration of love for God and our neighbor were the two primary commandments according to the Christ. Economies which promote greed to the point where people go unaided have problems. Economies which try to take care of everything, and by virtue of this can take care of nothing have problems.

Christians must concern themselves with the people. We're neither communists nor capitalists. We are good citizens of our born environment. Good stewards of what we are given. Above all, we are kind and generous to anyone in need.

The Church has openly criticized most economies. The Church get criticized for this seemingly wishy washy stance. But it is nonetheless valid. By adopting a Christian world view, you're perfectly justified in pointing out the errors in any economic systems, since economics is not in the primary purview of Christianity. Love, Hope and Charity are.

Personally, I THINK I would favor an economy which blends some elements of socialism with some elements of capitalism. Allowing for free and open markets for the manufacture and trade of goods and property, but having industries which are directly tied to the basics of life, regulated, or run by the state. This way capitalists can still get rich of the making and trading of goods and technology, but the state should make sure that the sick are cared for, regardless of their financial status, and that the workers in any industry are fairly treated, fed, and housed. This can be done in a variety of ways. I don't profess to have an answer. I'm not an economist, and since this type of situation doesn't currently exist anywhere that I'm aware of, I'm guessing it also has a myriad of holes and problems. Such is life. We just keep on striving, but helping others all we can in the meantime.

Peace,

Steven

well said... thanks Steven.

[royal archer]

Originally Posted by universalist

Maybe if we as a nation would show as much interest in creating livable wage jobs,feeding the hungry,free health insurance,etc as we do in building up our war machine we would have money for the good of the poor and working class,the money spent on illegal wars and killing machinery is sickening to me as an American and Christian. In Chrst

Yes we could have ended the Sadam threat much cheeper. Much of the money spent in Iraq is rebuilding their infratructure, ecconomy, etc. We also spent millions by using weapons that reduced collateral damage instead of just carpet bombing.

[Pax et Caritas]

Pope Pius XI: "No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true socialist" (Quadragesimo Anno).

[Pius IX]

Originally Posted by universalist

Maybe if we as a nation would show as much interest in creating livable wage jobs,feeding the hungry,free health insurance,etc as we do in building up our war machine we would have money for the good of the poor and working class,the money spent on illegal wars and killing machinery is sickening to me as an American and Christian. In Chrst

First off, the idea of 'creating' living wage jobs is not something a 'nation' does, it is something a business does. And non-market 'public works' programs do not count.

I always wonder who these hungry area that those on the left seemed so concerned about. Other than maybe some homeless folks, there is no reason for anyone in the US to be going hungry. Even the poorest in the US are able to afford computers, televisions, and other luxury goods. This is one of the most visible and wonderful things about the US. The United States was for a long time, the paragon of capitalism and the free market. While it is not as free as it was, it is still relatively free compared to much of the rest of the world.

Socialists, while they might have lofty intentions, dont realize the chaos their policies wreck on a country. The 'living wage' is a good example (if you care for an explanation, I will give you one). I wont even touch the 'free' health care.

I do agree with your comments on the war machine though.

[rmcbride77]

Originally Posted by Pax et Caritas

Pope Pius XI: "No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true socialist" (Quadragesimo Anno).

exactly, I am not a true socialist But I do see the good in having some socialist structures to care for people.

[PoliSciProf]

In a way, this is a false dichotomy. Economic approaches are only part of what a good society requires. Other posters have already mentioned that a mixed regime is the best in practice and I concur. The problem with capitalism is that it must say NO to some profits. The failure to do this along with a tendency to look at the short term and the prioritize the private is what makes capitalism undeserving of three cheers as Irving Kristol (Bill's dad) wrote many years ago. In other words, some sort of virtue or moral sense of the whole is needed. (By the way, it gets two cheers because it is connected with democracy and the fact that markets rather than planning works best in a complex society and supports growth with helps the least advantaged.Socialism fails in practice (but not totally) but it appeals to higher sensibilities. There is a deep yearning for community that make it appealing. Yet it produces inefficiencies and perhaps even hubris. What is probably the best is some sort of regulated capitalism that respects free markets and creates safety nets for those who are victims of the creative destruction of capitalism. Sounds like the New Deal to me. Or, if you prefer, it is akin to polity, Aristotle's most practical good regime. As the Stagirite put it. a regime that respects the rule of law and in which both the rich and the poor feel that it favors them is the most practical regime. In more modern terms, the middle class is to be encouraged. This requires a statesmanship that is not ideological but pragmatic. False dichotomies just make understanding the political more difficult.

[Dempsey1919]

I think most of us have been complementary of the Amish in the comunity aspects of their society such as barn raising where all members of the community contribute labor. The great part of what they do is that they do it with out a controlling central government.

I like the way the Amish take care of each other, and I wish my parish would do the same. I am sure there are poor members of our community who would benefit from our help. We Catholics should do more to help each other in our times of need. My parish donates a lot of money to the Third World, and although I think this is great, I wish a percentage of that money could be retained and shared among the poor of our parish.

Maybe if we as a nation would show as much interest in creating livable wage jobs,feeding the hungry,free health insurance,etc as we do in building up our war machine we would have money for the good of the poor and working class,the money spent on illegal wars and killing machinery is sickening to me as an American and Christian. In Chrst

Unfortunately, a strong millitary is needed in today's world. Terrorists would attack us from every angle were it not for our strong military. The "war machine" is a necessary evil because it enables us to defend freedom and democracy.

I am with you on this one

I try to vote for the candidate or party that takes care of the worker, the poor, the middle class and has policies that take care of the disabled and all those that fall through the cracks.
My wife and I both call ourselves socialists, though I don't think we are pure socialists. I think we, like the UK, think that having some socialist programs and policies makes a better form of government. I think socialism more closely follows the teachings of Christ and His Church

thanks for posting this

Ron

You're welcome.

I also agree with your political stance. In our societies, nobody should go hungry, everybody should have access to free healthcare, the weak and infirm should be cared for. However, I think everyone should have the right to accumulate wealth and live in prosperity. I think a capitalist society with socialist policies would be the ideal form of government. Like you, I also think socialist-capitalism more closely follows the teachings of Christ and his Church.

Socialists, while they might have lofty intentions, dont realize the chaos their policies wreck on a country. The 'living wage' is a good example (if you care for an explanation, I will give you one). I wont even touch the 'free' health care.

I don't think socialist policies reek havoc on a society. I think mild socialist policies are excellent because they provide care and assistance to the poor and vulnerable. Nationalised industries save jobs and provide better working conditions to the worker in many instances.

I think every country should provide free healthcare to all. The National Health Service (UK) was establised in 1948 and is still going strong. Without free healthcare, people would die of easily treatable illnesses solely because they can't afford the medical costs. My grandmother lived before the NHS was establised, and she told me that a lot of people never went to the doctors because they couldn't afford it. She said life was very hard without free healthcare, and that many people died because they couldn't afford medical help. I think this is wrong. Nobody should die because they can't afford medical care. As Christians, we should ensure that everybody, regardless of class, has access to the best healthcare possible. Saving lives shouldn't be about profit or making money.

[mlchance]

Originally Posted by Dempsey1919

I think every country should provide free healthcare to all.

There is no such thing as free healthcare. All healthcare is paid for. The only question is who foots the bill.

-- Mark L. Chance.

[Dempsey1919]

There is no such thing as free healthcare. All healthcare is paid for. The only question is who foots the bill.

I was referring to publicly funded, nationalised healthcare.