Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Pope doesn't come over to where you work and slap Jamie Dimon's dick out of your mouth." [View all]Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)100. It has everything to do with capitalism and nothing to do with automation
Let's have the section again:
We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the invisible hand of the market. Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded.
Now, show me where automation is even implied in that passage.
No, you are apparently deliberately misconstruing what he says. He says that those who believe in the panacea of trickle-down economics express "a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system."
Francis isn't saying that capitalism is inherently bad. What he's saying is that we shouldn't fetishize it. We shouldn't treat it as if it's beyond reproach, something that we can't even dare to change. "We have created new idols. The worship of the ancient golden calf has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose." He worries about the "interests of a deified market."
BTW, here is part of John Paul II's Centesimus annus, section 42, (italics added):
Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?
The answer is obviously complex. If by capitalism is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a business economy, market economy or simply free economy. But if by capitalism is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.
The Marxist solution has failed, but the realities of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially the Third World, as does the reality of human alienation, especially in the more advanced countries. Against these phenomena the Church strongly raises her voice. Vast multitudes are still living in conditions of great material and moral poverty. The collapse of the Communist system in so many countries certainly removes an obstacle to facing these problems in an appropriate and realistic way, but it is not enough to bring about their solution. Indeed, there is a risk that a radical capitalistic ideology could spread which refuses even to consider these problems, in the a priori belief that any attempt to solve them is doomed to failure, and which blindly entrusts their solution to the free development of market forces.
The answer is obviously complex. If by capitalism is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a business economy, market economy or simply free economy. But if by capitalism is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.
The Marxist solution has failed, but the realities of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially the Third World, as does the reality of human alienation, especially in the more advanced countries. Against these phenomena the Church strongly raises her voice. Vast multitudes are still living in conditions of great material and moral poverty. The collapse of the Communist system in so many countries certainly removes an obstacle to facing these problems in an appropriate and realistic way, but it is not enough to bring about their solution. Indeed, there is a risk that a radical capitalistic ideology could spread which refuses even to consider these problems, in the a priori belief that any attempt to solve them is doomed to failure, and which blindly entrusts their solution to the free development of market forces.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
124 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"Pope doesn't come over to where you work and slap Jamie Dimon's dick out of your mouth." [View all]
rufus dog
Dec 2013
OP
I left the computer for a few hours and only saw this now.. just so you know
Voice for Peace
Dec 2013
#30
They'd get their servants to sweep it up and sell it to a coal fired power plant.
MADem
Dec 2013
#17
More like a national disgrace. Why does no one picket, demonstrate against, occupy, these abusers?
freshwest
Dec 2013
#77
Same reason Occupy couldn't protest in front of the Stock Exchange. It's all private property.
Spitfire of ATJ
Dec 2013
#82
Well kinda. The sidewalks aren't private property. No one seems to protest these guys and
freshwest
Dec 2013
#85
Love it! Love it! Love it! I hope the network doesn't try to force him to apologize.
mucifer
Dec 2013
#21
Thank you, and Jon Stewart. Conservatives are clearly proud of being evil, murderous, greedy scum.
Zorra
Dec 2013
#29
Loved this! I had to interrupt my laughing out loud to explain to mr z who jamie dimon is
me b zola
Dec 2013
#46
I will forever remember Dimon as the dog who barked "Everyone should always pay their mortgage"
Kurovski
Dec 2013
#47
It has everything to do with capitalism and nothing to do with automation
Fortinbras Armstrong
Dec 2013
#100
" I'm sure at this point you are no longer interested in a conversation."
Fortinbras Armstrong
Dec 2013
#106
actually, I've always thought an Aussie accent sounds like a mixture of Brit and American
Skittles
Dec 2013
#71
Kudlow rambles on about what a hot little Catholic he is and how he "adores" the pope.
Kurovski
Dec 2013
#86
It's a common response to hecklers in the comedy biz, and has been for 40 years or more
alcibiades_mystery
Dec 2013
#98