In the tenth and eleventh postings in this series, we
demonstrated that capitalism is based on two premises, one true, and one
false. In today’s posting we will show
that socialism is also based on two premises, both of which are false. This is, in fact, why the Catholic Church
condemns socialism, while it “only” criticizes capitalism.
Capitalism is based on the true premise that the right to
property is absolute, and the false premise that the rights of property are
also absolute. For its part, socialism
is based on the false premises that the right to property is not absolute, and that
the rights of property may be defined in a way that removes the absolute
character of the right to property.
Thus, whether a society permits private ownership, even
universal private ownership, it remains socialist if the State or the community
retains the right to deprive someone of his or her ownership — including the
fruits of ownership consisting of control and the receipt of all income
attributable to whatever is owned — at the will of the State, a majority of the
citizens, or for any other reason without just cause or due process, or in any
way that denies that every person has the natural right to be an owner.
The effect of abolishing the absolute character of the right
to be an owner, inherent in every human being by nature itself, is to make all
natural rights insecure, that is, alienable.
This changes the character of the natural law itself. By making any natural right insecure, all
natural rights become insecure.
A society may “permit” private ownership — but that is
precisely the trouble. It permits private ownership. It does not recognize and protect it as an
inalienable, absolute right. This
constitutes the abolition of private property as a natural right, and is the essence
of socialism.
The basis of society itself is shifted from a theory of law
based on reason, to a theory of law based on private interpretation of
something those with power accept as the will of a god, whether explicitly or
implicitly, and whether actually divine, or a manmade creation with immense
power, such as Hobbes’s characterization of the State as a “Mortall God.”
This is completely unacceptable if society is to remain
human in any meaningful sense. Thus, as
Pope Pius XI declared in no uncertain terms,
“But what if Socialism has really been so tempered and modified as
to the class struggle and private ownership that there is in it no longer
anything to be censured on these points? Has it thereby renounced its
contradictory nature to the Christian religion? This is the question that holds
many minds in suspense. And numerous are the Catholics who, although they
clearly understand that Christian principles can never be abandoned or
diminished seem to turn their eyes to the Holy See and earnestly beseech Us to
decide whether this form of Socialism has so far recovered from false doctrines
that it can be accepted without the sacrifice of any Christian principle and in
a certain sense be baptized. That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may
answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a
doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly
Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which
we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic
Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian
truth.” (Quadragesimo Anno, § 117.)
