4 ms·

> Distributism (also known as distributionism or distributivism) is an economic ideology that developed in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th century based

> Distributism (also known as distributionism or distributivism) is an economic ideology that developed in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th century based upon the principles of Catholic social teaching, especially the teachings of Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Rerum novarum and Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo anno. > According to distributists, property ownership is a fundamental right, and the means of production should be spread as widely as possible, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state capitalism), a few individuals (plutocracy), or corporations (corporatocracy). Distributism, therefore, advocates a society marked by widespread property ownership. > Distributism has often been described in opposition to both socialism and capitalism, which distributists see as equally flawed and exploitative. Thomas Storck argues: "both socialism and capitalism are products of the European Enlightenment and are thus modernizing and anti-traditional forces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism So not to be snarky, but how is this anything more than simple "Marxism, minus the parts that don't work with Catholic religion, plus Catholic religion"?

AlphaSite 9y ago
Shared ownership vs individual ownership, I think?
svieira 9y ago
Properly understood, Distributism is capitalism limited by an understanding of the purpose of capital. Just as there is no mathematical system that can prove all of its first principles, so there is no system of capital that can within itself articulate a just distribution of that capital. The assertions of Distributism are that: * Everyone has a right to private property (ad contra of Marxism) * That right to private property is not absolute (ad contra of laissez faire capitalism) * Laws should aim for the maximum distribution of the means of production, rather than the optimal throughput of productivity possible with those means (ad contra of if-it-is-not-100%-it-is-not-a-monopoly capitalism) This is inspired by Catholic principles and promoted by Catholic thinkers, but it is certainly something one can come to without being Catholic.
- pfisch 9y ago
  >Laws should aim for the maximum distribution of the means of production, rather than the optimal throughput of productivity possible with those means Won't you just get run out by others who are focused on productivity and can beat you in trade and undercut your prices while delivering higher quality? By a lot of accounts nomadic life was much better than early farm life. Didn't help the nomads in the end though.
microcolonel 9y ago
Well, achieving the Marxist utopia involves forcing the genuine owners of capital goods ("the means of production") to surrender those to the state, in practice usually requiring imprisonment, execution, and initially a certain amount of genocide to avoid revolt. Clumsily named, the aspects of "distributism" being lauded here only seem to involve convincing people to partly own instutitions rather than simply transacting with them as a third party. Seems to me that this reading of "distributism" is just capitalism plus a social norm of a bias toward involvement and ownership, rather than just employment and consumption.
- vanderZwan 9y ago
  > Well, achieving the Marxist utopia involves forcing the genuine owners of capital goods ("the means of production") to surrender those to the state, in practice usually requiring imprisonment, execution, and initially a certain amount of genocide to avoid revolt. That is Communism, not Marxism.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    No, it's the Marxist part that makes it not work, doesn't matter which inspired party adds their flavour. If you want Marx's society (not saying his analysis, especially of his surroundings, was wholely incorrect), it can only be had by force. I challenge you to convince me to willingly join in your Marxian ideal, until then I will fight it when it comes to my door, like so many in the USSR understandably didn't, comfortably boiled frogs as the record shows them.
    - vanderZwan 9y ago
      > I challenge you to convince me to willingly join in your Marxian ideal, until then I will fight it when it comes to my door, like so many in the USSR understandably didn't, comfortably boiled frogs as the record shows them. a) I don't have a Marxist ideal, don't put yourself in a defensive position against an antagonist that is not there. I just don't mix up Marxist economic theory with Communism and Leninism. b) Your view of history is perverse, and insulting to the many people that resisted and were killed off by Lenin & Co when they took power.

AlphaSite 9y ago

Shared ownership vs individual ownership, I think?

svieira 9y ago

Properly understood, Distributism is capitalism limited by an understanding of the purpose of capital. Just as there is no mathematical system that can prove all of its first principles, so there is no system of capital that can within itself articulate a just distribution of that capital. The assertions of Distributism are that: * Everyone has a right to private property (ad contra of Marxism) * That right to private property is not absolute (ad contra of laissez faire capitalism) * Laws should aim for the maximum distribution of the means of production, rather than the optimal throughput of productivity possible with those means (ad contra of if-it-is-not-100%-it-is-not-a-monopoly capitalism) This is inspired by Catholic principles and promoted by Catholic thinkers, but it is certainly something one can come to without being Catholic.

pfisch 9y ago
>Laws should aim for the maximum distribution of the means of production, rather than the optimal throughput of productivity possible with those means Won't you just get run out by others who are focused on productivity and can beat you in trade and undercut your prices while delivering higher quality? By a lot of accounts nomadic life was much better than early farm life. Didn't help the nomads in the end though.

microcolonel 9y ago

Well, achieving the Marxist utopia involves forcing the genuine owners of capital goods ("the means of production") to surrender those to the state, in practice usually requiring imprisonment, execution, and initially a certain amount of genocide to avoid revolt. Clumsily named, the aspects of "distributism" being lauded here only seem to involve convincing people to partly own instutitions rather than simply transacting with them as a third party. Seems to me that this reading of "distributism" is just capitalism plus a social norm of a bias toward involvement and ownership, rather than just employment and consumption.

vanderZwan 9y ago
> Well, achieving the Marxist utopia involves forcing the genuine owners of capital goods ("the means of production") to surrender those to the state, in practice usually requiring imprisonment, execution, and initially a certain amount of genocide to avoid revolt. That is Communism, not Marxism.
- microcolonel 9y ago
  No, it's the Marxist part that makes it not work, doesn't matter which inspired party adds their flavour. If you want Marx's society (not saying his analysis, especially of his surroundings, was wholely incorrect), it can only be had by force. I challenge you to convince me to willingly join in your Marxian ideal, until then I will fight it when it comes to my door, like so many in the USSR understandably didn't, comfortably boiled frogs as the record shows them.
  - vanderZwan 9y ago
    > I challenge you to convince me to willingly join in your Marxian ideal, until then I will fight it when it comes to my door, like so many in the USSR understandably didn't, comfortably boiled frogs as the record shows them. a) I don't have a Marxist ideal, don't put yourself in a defensive position against an antagonist that is not there. I just don't mix up Marxist economic theory with Communism and Leninism. b) Your view of history is perverse, and insulting to the many people that resisted and were killed off by Lenin & Co when they took power.