Skip to comments.Pope says he is not a "Marxist" and it is not time to start "clericalizing" women
Posted on 12/15/2013 9:14:52 AM PST by NYer
click here to read article
I believe in an apprenticeship model, and hire and develop employees this way. I deliberately have a few very junior people as well as senior people in my organization doing similar work. I work at a large company, but value small business and small government. I believe that big business generally prefers big government, and is often as much a threat to liberty as left-wing advocacy groups. None of this has a direct effect on my policy preferences.
IMO there's no such thing as being influenced in only one sphere. Cases in point:
A new European Central Bank study has also found that Catholics are more likely to favour sharing wealth and to support government intervention in the economy than are Protestants.....
[Max Weber] ....noted that societies which had more Protestants had a more highly developed capitalist economy and that, in societies with different religions, the most successful business leaders were Protestant. Weber also argued that Catholicism impeded the development of capitalism in the West, as did Confucianism and Buddhism in the East...."...relative to Roman Catholicism, Reformed Protestantism has curbed preferences for redistribution and for government intervention in the economy.
-- from the thread Catholics 'more likely to back state economic intervention' [European Central Bank study]
Despite what one might think, economics is not morally or theologically neutral. Every business action supports a certain economic paradigm and in doing so, supports a certain and specific theology. Every businessperson needs to understand that taking a specific economic position gives insight into your view of theology, morality and God. These insights must be addressed because it will affect how you run your business....For a business owner, it could be whether you maximize your profits or how you compensate your employees, issues like that....Economics is certainly not morally or theologically neutral. To take a stance as a Marxist, Keynesian, or an Adam Smith Capitalist reveals insight into your view of man, God and redemption....
....These truths are not the same as capitalism. Yet capitalism is the one economic paradigm that is most congruent with Calvins teachings and the Biblical economic truths I mentioned....Calvin believed wealth cannot be evil because God chooses to bless some with wealth. But, whether wealthy or poor, Calvin and the Bible exhort us to be content with our economic positions in life and to live a life following his word, not chasing after wealth....People who think of Calvin as equating material prosperity with eternal destiny are misreading him. But if someone is in difficulty, then maybe that is where that person needs to be in this life for the sake of his eternal life. That may be an expression of Gods will.
-- from the thread How theology ties into economics
I agree with distributism in theory and for conservatives who truly understand it, I agree they would choose a more contemporary form of it. The larger the society, the more it’s principals are needed. Many conservatives think there is nothing wrong with lassiez faire capitalism. But today’s capitalism is driven by greed and power and takes on many totalitarian aspects. Is the capitalism that we have today better thans the socialism of today. Of course...it always has been. But greed has driven it beyond the pale of Christian ethics.
And if they weren’t loud and clear already, the latest news is he’s kicked out Cardinal Burke as member of Congregation of Bishops.
Really? Has someone posted a thread on this yet?
I don’t think so. I will.
I do a lot of poaching myself, and am ruthless about it.
The less experienced people in my shop are not “entry level” - they have at least 2-3 years of experience and a quantitative MS or PhD. We pay them well, and so I can select the best.
My policy preference is minarchy, a very small government.
I believe in liberty of contract, and also believe that Congress does not have the power to delegate legislative powers to the Executive. In short, most regulations put in place since 1933, Social Security, Medicare, EPA, OSHA, NCLB/Common Core, etc are unconstitutional and unlawful.
So if anything my policy preferences are staunchly free market, not distributist.
To paraphrase Edmund Burke: when men forget the laws of the heart, the laws go on the books.
Perhaps he will do what you are saying, but what will you think if he doesn't?
I'm thinking he made a mistake wading into any kind of economic debate with the words he chose, nothing more, nothing less than a simple mistake. Hopefully it will not be significant, or turn into something more sinister.
The statement maybe one of those nervous tics, akin to adding after a critical statement, "Some of my best friends are _____."
Assuming there was more to it than that, though, is he actually talking about those who are "actively promoting" Marxism?
As opposed to MINOs, say? College professors who like a certain vocabulary but aren't about to seize the state. Italians who vote for a post-Communist party because their parents voted for the Communist Party.
Former party members or disillusioned radicals who gave up on Communism or big state solutions but still can't repudiate some sliver of their former beliefs -- if only a name or label. Most of these people aren't in Rush's world or yours or mine, but I'd suppose it would be hard to avoid them in Italy.
Maybe the Mandela commotion provides a context for the discussion. For many people Mandela was still a Marxist to the day he died, but others would say that he wasn't by any means "actively promoting" Marxism in recent years.
Take Bergoglios comments and replace the word Marxist with Nazi. Are we having a different conversation? If so, why?
"Nazi" is more like "Stalinist" or "Leninist" -- too closely tied to actual murderous policies. I'd have a hard time saying that a Leninist or a Stalinist or a Nazi was actually a good person. Personally, I wouldn't say a Marxist was a good person, but the ambiguity is greater there.
I might say that you could find some good in someone who happened to be a Marxist or a fascist, if their Marxism or fascism were theoretical enough and not tied to actual murderous acts. I wouldn't say that someone like that was a "good person," but I don't know if the pope, who isn't the most skilled at media relations, would say that either if he had time to think it out.
This isn't something we come across everyday in the US, but in Italy, quasi-Marxists and quasi-Communists and quasi-fascists abound, and dealing with them might be difficult. Even outside Italy, Europe's Socialist Parties work in a democratic and capitalist framework, but have a lot of trouble figuring out what there relationship to Marx is, and just who Karl Marx really was, what he believed, and what relevance it might have to the present.
Good to hear! Like I said, I respect what you’re doing. Many industries seem to b against that. Check the plant I am at now has tuition reimbursement, but saw that if you take advantage of it, it is a carrier ending move. HR views it as you are looking for a new job, and they don’t want to train the competition.
Does that mean Original Sin no longer applies?
We are not all bad, but we are NOT good.
The only thing that could possibly be more loud and clear at this point would be Gabriel’s Horn.
That’s beautiful, lj! I love it. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.