The Problem of the Human Person

If you want to develop a solution to what’s going on in the world today, you have to start with the human person.  If something — such as a “Great Reset” — does not tend to the good of a human being as a human being, then it cannot be said to be good.

JTW Podcast: Dr. Robert H.A. Ashford on Capital Ownership

This particular podcast comes with a little caveat.  We agree with what Dr. Robert Ashford says, but not necessarily how he says it, e.g., he uses the term “capitalism” when we prefer “economic personalism.”  Other than that, you won’t find too many differences, so this audio recording should be of great interest, at least the first part:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 33

What with everything else that’s going on, it seems that the politicians can’t wait to see how fast they can drive the entire world into chaos and bankruptcy . . . not necessarily in that order:

Economic Personalism is Applied Solidarism

One of the problems with modern life is the extreme compartmentalization that has accompanied the development of what G.K. Chesterton called “the Double Mind of Man.”  What Chesterton meant is the not-so-modern practice of accepting contradiction.

Solidarism, Personalism, and Social Justice

If you want to trigger a violent discussion in pretty much any forum, you don’t need to drag in politics, religion, or even the Great Pumpkin.  No all you need is to mention social justice.  Regardless how you define it, somebody else will tell you that you’re wrong and everything you say is a lie, not to mention stupid, vindictive, ignorant, stupid, vicious, stupid, malicious, stupid and just plain stupid.  And that’s when they’re being polite about it.

The Rise and Development of Solidarism

A short time ago we looked over the website of an organization ostensibly dedicated to promoting solidarity and solidarism as the solution to the ills of the world.  Intrigued, we looked the website over carefully.  After a bit, we noticed something distinctly odd.  The organization talked a lot about solidarity . . . but didn’t define it anywhere!  We won't embarrass them by posting a link or revealing their Secret Identity.

JTW Podcast: The Four Pillars of a Just Market Economy

What are the four things that, in our opinion, an economy needs in order to be considered just?  You can probably guess the first one right away: widespread private property in capital.  And the other three? 1) A limited economic role for the State, 2) free and open markets, and 3) restoration of the rights 0of private property:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 32

We could probably sum up all of today’s news items (except our lament that LeVar Burton was not selected as host of Jeopardy) just by saying that the money system is screwed up.  Since that would hardly fill trhe page, here are some specific reasons we have for saying that:

The Magic of Future Savings

If you want to baffle and outrage both socialists and capitalists — kin under the skin more than either group realizes — tell them that it is possible to have expanded capital ownership without either redefining ownership or redistributing what belongs to others.  Socialists will bellow that you cannot have widespread ownership without changing the meaning of ownership, while capitalists will shriek that the only way others can own anything is to take it from them.

Abolishing Private Property

In the previous posting on this subject, we closed by noting that at some point the noted lawyer-economist Louis O. Kelso asked himself the questions (probably not in these exact words), “If advancing technology makes such superabundance possible, why is it essential for people to have employers to pay them wages for labor that is not necessary for production?”

The Expanded Ownership Revolution

One of the many paradoxes involved in the Great Reset and similar proposals has to do with human nature and the natural law.  As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, despite centuries of failure adherents insist that the abolition of private property and redistribution will work if we just manage to change human nature, try harder, and commit sufficient resources to the effort.

JTW Podcast: Adler on the Six Great Ideas: Truth

Today’s podcast we get to hear Mortimer Adler on what truth is.  The short answer, which you can hear about a minute and a half into the video, is “Truth consists in the agreement of what we think and what is in the world, what is real.”  Obviously, this comes into serious conflict with all the people who think that we can make our own truth and force it on others if we just have enough power over them:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 31

If there is one word to describe the current world situation, it is “surreal.”  One of the problems has been that for more than two-hundred years the idea has been gaining ground that “humanity” (an abstraction) is far more important than humans.  That sort of thinking is the basis of capitalism, socialism, “ultrasupernaturalism” (what Msgr. Ronald Knox defined as an excess of charity that causes disunity), and “New Age” thinking.  Many people today think they can create truth rather than work to discover it.  It’s so much easier to impose your created truth on others rather than do the hard work of conforming to reality.  Maybe that’s why people still haven’t caught on to the Just Third Way . . . it’s too much work.

A Systematic Diffusion of Power

Ironically, it is not out of the realm of possibility that had Theodore Roosevelt won the 1912 U.S. Presidential election, World War I might never have occurred.  It might also have occurred to Judge Peter S. Grosscup and the Rough Rider that when the Federal Reserve was finally established in 1914, here was the desperately needed source of financing that could open access to ownership by all Americans of America’s vast corporate wealth without the necessity of past savings and without redistribution or taxation.

Something Missing

Sometimes we’re tempted to paraphrase Vince Lombardi (even if he didn’t actually say it) and say that money isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.  We’d be completely wrong, of course, but money — properly understood — is such a key element of any economy that it’s easy to make that kind of mistake.

Is There a “Third Way”?

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, we believe it is a fundamental principle of economic personalism that every human being is a person, and as such should be both a producer or creator and a consumer — a binary relationship, integral to personalism itself.  The right to consume is rarely questioned (at least out loud), but what doesn’t seem to cross people’s minds is the need for everyone to be productive.  Each person should have access to the means of employing both labor and capital to do so.

JTW Podcast: Review of Adler’s “The Great Ideas”

Here is a video review of Mortimer Adler’s “the Great Ideas” books by “Andrew the Red.”  There’s some good stuff here about the state of education today and how difficult it is to get an actual education:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 30

Other people and things may get into the Summer Doldrums, but not us.  There is always something going on, whether at CESJ, the Just Third Way, Justice University, and other individuals and groups:

Binary Economic Personalism

It may have a somewhat lengthy name — the Just Third Way of Economic Personalism — but it is much more straightforward and logical than people living in a world soaked in Keynesian Kraziness might suppose.  In the previous posting on this subject, we noted how many (although not all) aspects of life are “binary” and tend either to be in balance or try to move toward a balance to function properly.  This, naturally enough, led us to economic personalism, which is based on an application of binary economics.

The Meaning of Life

At the end of the previous posting on this subject, we asked the question, “what is the meaning of life within the Just Third Way?”  This came up because during their (in)famous 1927 debate, “Do We Agree?” (the answer to which, as Hilaire Belloc pointed out, is “no”), G.B. Shaw claimed that the only thing that mattered is income (i.e., consumption power and material wellbeing), regardless how you get it.

“Do We Agree?”

To answer that question briefly — and accurately — no, “we” don’t . . . if by “we” is meant G.K. Chesterton and G.B. Shaw.  The reference is to their final, er, “debate (for want of a better word) in November of 1927.

JTW Podcast: How to Speak and How to Listen

Today’s podcast is from a set of tapes, one of which is this lecture that Mortimer Adler gave many years ago on basic learning skills:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 29

Some very interesting things have been going on this week . . . not all of them bad!

The Source of Power

 

Whether carrying out individual or social acts of virtue, the ordinary means of economically empowering persons both as individuals and as members of groups is private property in capital.  Recognizing equal access to private property in productive capital as a universal human right is a crucial difference between economic personalism and both capitalism and socialism. (Laborem Exercens, §§ 14-15.)

What is “The Gift of Self”?

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the concept of personalism from an Aristotelian-Thomist perspective is based on the sovereignty of the human person under God.  It includes five key characteristics:

The Reality of the Human Person

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, any “social teaching” that does not respect the dignity of every human person, that interpretation is by definition incorrect or faulty.  Admittedly, we’ve been picking on Catholic social teaching, but that’s only because the Catholic Church has the most comprehensive — and misunderstood, even by (or especially) by Catholics — body of social thought in the world today, at least from a personalist point of view.

JTW Podcast: Universalizing Capital Ownership

This past Thursday, a Justice University team participated in a webinar presented by the International Association for Peace and Economic Development (IAED) on “The Just Third Way: Universalizing Capital Ownership.  Presenting the case for the Just Third Way of Economic Personalism were Dr. Norman Kurland, president of the interfaith Center for Economic and Social Justice, Dawn K. Brohawn, Director of Communications for CESJ, and Michael D. Greaney, CESJ’s Director of Research:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 28

While we prefer to report on positive things, there haven’t been too many lately.  Still, there are a few, although mixed in with quite a bit of negative items:

Personalism and Solidarism

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, we saw how the “personalism” of Pope John Paul II fit into the broader framework of social virtue, particularly social justice . . . which is not socialism, however much some confused people insist that it is.

A Missing Piece of the Puzzle

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the idea that many people have of social justice today is not entirely accurate.  It does not mean replacing individual justice and charity with redistribution, even if you call it social justice.  Social justice means, rather, reform of institutions of the common good to enable the individual virtues once again to function as intended.

The Virtue of Social Justice

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, by the beginning of the nineteenth century it had become obvious that the old individualist way of doing things was insufficient, and by the end of the nineteenth century it was just as obvious that the collectivist way was even worse.  The only thing left was what most people simply couldn’t get a handle on: the personalist way of doing things.

JTW Podcast: Three Principles of Economic Justice

Just in case you were wondering what real economic justice looks like — it has three principles that it must embody if it is to be considered “just.”  Hint: “economic justice” does not mean “redistribution.”

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 27

As the global situation continues to heat up in everything but a good way, world leaders seem more intent than ever on keeping old and failed programs going instead of implementing something that actually works and has been proven to work: the Just Third Way of Economic Personalism:

What “Social Justice” REALLY Means

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, individual and social virtue are two different things, and each has a specific job to do that complements, but does not replace, the other.  Individual virtue is directed to the good of individuals, of human persons.  Social virtue is directed to the common good, that is, the institutional environment within which human persons realize their individual good.

The Right Tool for the Job

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the possibly confusingly-named “Reign of Christ the King ain’t exactly what it sounds like.  It begs for a bit of explanation — which is what today’s posting is about.

Reign of Christ the King?

In the previous posting on this subject, we saw that while God made the world, he didn’t create human society.  Human beings did that, so it’s no use blaming Him for what’s going wrong.  If there’s something wrong, it’s up to us to fix it.  The only question is how . . . especially when we discover that individually we are pretty helpless to effect changes in the social order.  What happens then?

JTW Podcast: Mortimer Adler on Socrates

Many people today claim to see no use in philosophy . . . which is itself a philosophy!  This week we take a look at what Mortimer Adler, the “Great Books” philosopher, thought about Socrates.  You might find it interesting . . . and we won’t make you take a snort of hemlock if you don’t agree, either!

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 26

Attention, all Savoyards and admirers of the Bard of Avon.  Be careful how you quote or even if you quote.  The degree of cultural illiteracy in the world is rising faster than the mercury in Death Valley at noon in summer.  You also might want to be wary of reading books like Huckleberry Finn, Brideshead Revisited, Tarzan of the Apes, Gone With the Wind, or anything that mentions You-Know-Who or You-Know-What, so whatever you say, say nothing:

Coercive Virtue?

Can you force people to be virtuous?

The quick and easy answer to that question is no, you cannot.  As Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.”  (Address at Western Michigan University, December 18, 1963.)

Ronald Knox v. the Godly

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, people whom Msgr. Ronald A. Knox labeled “enthusiasts” have a definite tendency not only to think themselves better than everyone else and separate from such ungodly ones, but often have a strong tendency to act on it in a more forceful manner when the ungodly refuse to accept guidance or act, think, or believe the “right” way.

The Godly v. the Ungodly

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, how we understand the meaning and purpose of life has a significant effect on our thinking.  If we think that this life is primarily or solely to establish a perfect world — what the early socialists called “the Kingdom of God on Earth” — then anything that gets in the way of building a perfect society can and must be eliminated.  The end justifies the means.

JTW Podcast: Mortimer Adler Tells It Like It Is

. . . Or as it should be.  As Francis Bacon put it, “What is truth? said the jesting Pilate and would not stay for an answer.”  According to J.M. Bochenski, O.P. in The Methods of Contemporary Thought, truth is that which conforms to reality.  As for Mortimer Adler:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 25

We start off today’s news items with the CESJ Bookstore, which you might want to patronize.  If you can’t see anything, evidently you have to turn off some kind of ad blocker and you get everything.  The other big concern is China, which makes up the bulk of this week’s Just Third Way news . . . even though what China is doing can hardly be called just.  Consider it a warning:

Improvising History

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the Catholic Church’s Second Vatican Council in economic terms was intended to solidify and carry out the program that had been developed to counter socialism: foster a state of society characterized by widespread capital ownership.  Socialism had by the time of the Council so permeated understanding of the Church’s natural law social teachings, however, that the “modernists,” as they were inappropriately called, were able to turn an administrative event into a revolution.

Still Not Really About Religion

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the backwash from the Second Vatican Council didn’t really have much to do with what most people think of as “religion,” but with seizing the opportunity to advance a relatively new concept of religion that had been messing things up for the previous century and a half.

Not Really About Religion

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, private property is so important to a just society that it was included in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 17), for which Pope Pius XII had been pushing and was joined by none other than Eleanor Roosevelt.

JTW Podcast: The Economics of Reality and Justice

After a short hiatus, the series based on the book Economic Personalism is back.  And don’t forget that the book is available for free in e-format.  This particular episode seems to have generated some very positive comments, e.g.,

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 24

With all the craziness going on in the world, you’d think there was nothing to be hopeful about.  You’d be right, if it wasn’t for the Just Third Way of Economic Personalism.  Fortunately, however, matters have not yet come to the point where nothing can be done:

The Rights of Man

We’re tempted to begin this posting with our usual, “As we said in the previous posting on this subject”  . . . so we will yield to temptation and begin by saying that in the previous posting on this subject, we asked the question whether material wellbeing is the sole end of existence, such as the Fabians and other socialists claimed, or if there was something more.

The Fabian Flood

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt got the New Deal implemented using some rather shady tactics.  Don’t just take our word for it, however.  Anyone who wants to get a somewhat different perspective than is given in the Keynesian history books and current political rhetoric can read, e.g., Amity Shlaes’s The Forgotten Man (2009).  She’s obsessed with the stock market as somehow  being an economic indicator, but don’t let that stop you from the getting the real value the book has to offer.

The Un-Natural New Deal

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, Catholics — or at least some of them — finally seem to have made the grade and become part of the mainstream by the 1930s . . . depending on what is meant by “mainstream” and a few other things, like “making the grade.”  With Msgr. John Ryan and Fr. Charles Coughlin leading the way, however, everything looked just peachy-keeno.

JTW Podcast: What is Education?

The current discussion over the next Jeopardy host (and why NOT LeVar Burton?), underscores the problem with what many people think education is today: training people to be technicians and for jobs that no longer exist.  We would disagree with Adler’s use of the word “men,” but not with his meaning: Academia is not educating people, buyt training and indoctrinating them:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 23

There are some very interesting news items this week, many of which reveal widespread misunderstanding regarding the nature of money.  Many people talk about it, but very few seem to have any real idea what it is.  To lighten things up a little, however, we lead off with a free plug for the CESJ Bookstore, which you really should visit:

The New Double Deal

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, serious efforts had been made to try and deal with the rapid spread of socialism and moral relativism in both Church and State, but very little had been effective.  It seems that when dealing with the worldly, St. Paul was right about being as sly as serpents — albeit still honest and truthful — for adherents of the new things have never let truth or even common civility stand in their way.

Sabotaging Solidarism

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, Fulton J. Sheen in the United States, and G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc in the United Kingdom locked horns early on with the forces of socialism and moral relativism, and were in many respects neutralized.  If you asked most people what it was that the American Chesterton and the English Sheen were most concerned with, you would very likely get quite a number of answers, few of which would mention socialism or moral relativism.

The Attack on Fulton Sheen

In the previous posting on this subject, we related how Fulton Sheen was called to the Catholic University of America to deal with the problem of socialism and moral relativism that had taken over the university.  The problem was that Bishop Shahan, who brought Sheen in to fix the problem, retired in 1927, and the situation quickly degenerated.

JTW Podcast: Are You Happy?

 

Mortimer Adler once made the point that trying to decide whether you’re happy or have had a happy life is not a question that can be answered until you’ve reached the end of it.  Nevertheless, there are people who will sacrifice everything (usually other people) in order to get what they want, thinking it will bring them happiness . . . or what they think is happiness.

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 22

It seems to baffle people why we have a great and glorious economic recovery and yet most people don’t seem to be any better off than they were before.  Of course, there is the little matter of how “recovery” is being defined, and who actually is benefitting . . . and whether said recovery is all on paper (or just in the papers), but these are trivial details that matter only to the 99% who don’t have access to the means of becoming and remaining capital owners:

Defending Natural Law

 

In the previous posting on this subject, we looked at how Msgr. John A. Ryan, the Fabians, and other heirs to the mantle of Henry George worked to extend George’s thought from land to all forms of capital, and from George’s focus on the United States and Ireland to the world.  In addition, Émile Durkheim captured sociology and invented solidarism to oppose Although the victory of socialism seemed inevitable, however, it did not go unchallenged.

G.K. Chesterton v. “Some American Crank”

In the previous posting on this subject, we reviewed the influence of Henry George on the Fabian Society, and the influence of the Fabian Society.  Nor was the Fabian Society the only group influenced by George, and that influenced others, including groups and individuals in the Catholic Church.  More immediate in its effect on understanding of social justice — or, rather, misunderstanding — was the power wielded by Monsignor John A. Ryan of the Catholic University of America.

Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing

They say that the easiest way to hide something is in open sight; with a hat tip to Samuel Rosenberg’s 1974 Sherlockian showcase (okay, you find a better one), “naked is the best disguise.”  In other words, be so obvious about what you’re doing that nobody will believe you really mean it . . like the Fabian Society adopting the “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” as their emblem, telling people they were going to make everybody socialist, but just call it something else. . . .

JTW Podcast: Dr. Fedoryka on John Paul II

And now for something completely different . . . but not really.  This week we bring you a lecture by Dr. Damien P. Fedoryka, who at one time gave us a few good words on our compendium, Curing World Poverty (1994), whose concept of “gift” seems to come closer to what we discussed in our most recent book, Economic Personalism, than some of what is floating around as “the economy of gift” and a few other things:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 21

The big thing right now in the economy seems to be trying to figure out ways to get people to go back to work when they are either getting more from not working, or just don’t feel like getting back into the rat race.  Of course, proponents of raising the minimum wage insist that if prospective employers would pay more, they’d have all the workers they need.  The downside, of course, is that at some point it becomes cheaper to outsource or replace human beings with robots.  Robots don’t make demands, but then they don’t buy products, either.  No one is asking why not turn everybody into owners of the machines that are doing the work, which would solve a lot of problems:

The Socialist Counterattack

In the previous posting on this subject we saw that Pope Lei XIII’s 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum knocked both capitalists and socialists for a loop.  It was not long, however, before both groups had figured out ways to keep on doing what they were already doing and claim papal endorsement.  Of the two, however, the socialists took the initiative, as they were the ones most obviously targeted.

The Secret History of Rerum Novarum

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the agrarian socialist Henry George managed to make his brand of “the Democratic Religion” headline news throughout the English-speaking world in 1886 and 1887 by running for mayor of New York City . . . although people wonder to this day just what it was he expected to be able to do once he was in charge of the Big Apple.  New York may be the center of the universe (especially if you’re a New Yorker), but even the center of the universe isn’t the entire universe or even the whole state of New York.

The Struggle for Sanity

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject — not that we’re particularly pushing Catholicism — but the Catholic Church has from the beginning been the only consistent opponent of socialism and moral relativism in the modern world.  As G.K. Chesterton noted in the introduction he wrote to the published version of Fulton Sheen’s doctoral thesis, God and Intelligence in Modern Philosophy (1925), the Catholic Church is pretty much the “last man standing” when it comes to defending common sense in the world today.

JTW Podcast: Mortimer Adler, Aristotle, and Happiness

This week we again return to Mortimer Adler, who gives us a (relatively) short discourse on what Aristotle meant by “happiness.”  It might even give you something to think about:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 20

As the pandemic seems to be more or less winding down, sort of, maybe, people are struggling to figure out ways to restore the status quo or build a new world on the presumed ruins of the old.  This is nothing new; it’s happened after pretty much every major upheaval in history.  One of the more significant movements came out of the backwash from the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.  Eventually called “socialism,” it only succeeded in messing things up more . . . which makes us wonder why people think it’s going to be anymore successful now.

Reason and Infallibility

In the previous posting on this subject, we went into the various ways that popes prior to Leo XIII and Rerum Novarum tried to counter socialism and moral relativism.  The bottom line here, of course, is that trying to educate people in sound philosophy and democratic political principles wasn’t going anywhere without the personal power in the hands of ordinary people who remained at the mercy of those who controlled property and thus political and economic power.  When someone controls how you are allowed to live, they soon make great inroads into how you think or believe.

The Frustrated Reformer

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, when economic, political, social and even religious conditions deteriorated badly in the early nineteenth century, people turned to socialism to make things rights again.  Unfortunately, people didn’t want to hear why something they wanted was wrong, they wanted something that would help them immediately.

The Pope Condemns the New Things

In the previous posting on this subject, we looked at the circumstances that resulted in the first social encyclical, Mirari Vos, in 1832.  It turns out that Pope Gregory XVI condemned the Polish November Uprising of 1830-1831 because it was taken over by the socialists and a forged encyclical had been circulated calling on people to rise up and destroy the Church and abolish private property.

JTW Podcast: The Political Animal

This week we feature the latest video in the series on economic personalism, the book for which can be purchased or downloaded free from the CESJ website.  According to the host, this has proven to be one of Sensus Fidelium’s most popular series, despite the fact that it is an interfaith presentation on a Catholic network!:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 19

We have quite a few interesting news items this week, not all of which are calculated to give anyone confidence in the current system.  The manufactured “gas shortage” right now is, in fact, a vote of “no confidence” in the economic and political system that our leaders in government and Academia might want to pay attention to . . . .

What Happened in Poland

History, as they say, is written by the victors.  The problem with history-as-she-is-taught these days is that what passes for history sadly seems to fit that rather glib aphorism, especially when the subject is politics and religion, which pretty much sums up virtually the whole of history.

The Renegade Abbé

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, the “theory of certitude” led its developer, Félicité de Lamennais straight into modernism and socialism.  That is why Charles Perín believed him to be the first modernist, although that is a somewhat dubious honor.  It also explains why Pope Gregory XVI, who is generally regarded by liberals and radicals of both a religious and non-religious stripe as a reactionary monster, was actually concerned about the effect that de Lamennais’s theories would have — and were having — on the meaning of Christianity and even religion itself.

Faith OR Reason, or Faith AND Reason?

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, at the heart of the “new things” of which Pope Gregory XVI and Pope Leo XIII spoke is something called “the theory of certitude” developed by Félicité de Lamennais, and is the foundation of “Christian socialism.”

JTW Podcast: Mortimer Adler and Socrates

Remember the Bad Old Days when television was the Vast Wasteland, not like today’s fine educational programing and reality TV?  Today we return to those boring days of yesteryear.  On this week’s podcast we again have Mortimer J. Adler talking philosophy and philosophers, or (to be precise), one philosopher, Socrates:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 18

We have some interesting news items this week . . . if by “interesting” you mean completely baffling.  From the perspective of the Just Third Way, many of the problems that people are trying to solve by doing failed programs more intensively (and expensively) can be solved with ease with the Just Third Way of Economic Personalism.  Maybe it’s time to consider it:

What is the “Theory of Certitude”?

 When we last wrote on this subject (yesterday), we introduced (again) the “unhealthy, unkempt little bourgeois,” l’Abbé Hugues-Félicité Robert de Lamennais, whom Charles Périn, a professor at the University of Louvain who appears to have been the first to define modernism in today’s Catholic sense, regarded as the first modernist. (Le Modernisme dans l’Église d’après les lettres inédites de Lamennais, Paris, 1881.)

The “Unhealthy, Unkempt Little Bourgeois”

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, it was pretty obvious from the very beginning that in most cases what became known as socialism was being presented as an alternative to traditional Christianity.  The problem was with those that, intending to or not, concealed the socialism under the guise of orthodoxy.  This was the case with l’Abbé Hugues-Félicité Robert de Lamennais.

The Religion of Humanity

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, socialism did not start out as opposed to capitalism, but as an alternative to traditional Christianity, especially Catholicism.  Making today’s de facto surrender to socialism supremely ironic, this has been recognized from the very beginning of the establishment of the Catholic Church’s social doctrine as a distinct field of study.

JTW Podcast: Mortimer Adler and Mike Wallace

On this week’s podcast we have Mortimer J. Adler’s appearance on ABC’s The Fund for the Republic with Mike Wallace that aired on September 7, 1958.  Significantly, this was eight months after the publication of The Capitalist Manifesto in which Adler and Louis Kelso presented the case for expanded capital ownership as a fundamental human right:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 17

The various communications media keep touting “the recovery” and the fantastic “economic growth” . . . and at the same time insist on the need for raising the minimum wage, family assistance, Universal Basic Income, a Great Reset, Inclusive Capitalism, Democratic Socialism, and so on, because individuals and families just aren’t making it.  Why aren’t they calling for economic personalism so that everyone can participate in growth instead of trying to figure out more creative ways of redistributing what others produce?.

The Democratic Religion

 

In the previous posting on this subject, we closed by noting that the way the “new things” of modernism and socialism developed  was far more fantastic, even shocking than was depicted in Msgr. Robert Hugh Benson’s apocalyptic science fiction satire Lord of the World published in the early twentieth century.

A New Look at R. H. Benson’s “Lord of the World”

In the previous posting on this subject, we closed by asking the question how, if socialism and modernism (which doesn’t mean modernity) are so anti-human or contrary to human nature, how on Earth did they become so popular?  Let’s begin by taking a look at a novel from the beginning of the last century that a lot of people think they know something about, but usually don’t.

A Short Treatise on Sovereignty

As we noted in the previous posting on this subject, the political doctrine that all government revenue should come only from taxation is based on the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of the human person.  Whoever pays the costs of government controls government, unless politicians can figure out a way to hide the fact of who is really paying, as is the case when the government can create money.

JTW Podcast: Louis Kelso and Harold Channer Show (No. 3)

Last week we featured another interview of Louis Kelso  on the Harold Channer Show.  This week we have another Channer-Kelso interview, but add a twist: Abraham Henry “AH” Raskin of the New York Times:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 16

The stock market, of course, is soaring, having “recovered” from the concern of President Biden’s tax proposals, and the economy is again in full recovery mode . . . whatever that means.  Evidently a rising stock market is considered a leading economic indicator, when properly speaking it isn’t an indicator of anything except the price of used debt and equity.  What is really needed in this country and the world is a focus on productive activity that everyone can engage in, not fake production of gambling and speculation.

Getting Real About Money

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, turning control of money and credit to the State does not seem to have been a good idea — ever.  In the crudest sense, it separates the people who produce from the benefits of production, mainly consumption.  This undermines the first principle of economics as stated by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations: “Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production.”

The Past Savings Paradox

In the previous posting on this subject, we looked at some of the discrepancies and contradictions in Keynesian economics.  Today we take a look at what may be the single biggest problem with the economics of the architect of the New Deal.

The Economic Crimes of David Ricardo

As we closed the previous posting on this subject, we noted that David Ricardo “corrected” Adam Smith by declaring that labor alone is productive and gives value to something.  Things are not to be valued for their utility to the consumer, but in terms of what it cost in labor to produce it.

JTW Podcast: Louis Kelso and Harold Channer Show (No. 2)

Last week we featured an interview of Louis Kelso  on the Harold Channger Show.  This week we have another Channer-Kelso interview:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 15

More and more, it seems as if people and policymakers are avoiding coming to grips with what is really needed in today’s world: a way that will allow most people to lead productive and virtuous lives (however they might define virtue in their particular philosophical or religious framework) without having to depend on the rich or the State to provide for or secure their every need.  Why not a world in which everyone can be productive with capital, labor, or both?

From Need to Greed

In the previous posting on this subject, we noted that usury has become so embedded in our economic thinking that it’s accepted as normal.  Paradoxically, some proposals to abolish usury are themselves usurious, e.g., the government should simply issue the money it needs and abolish taxes.  It’s accepted as normal for a government to back its own currency with its own debt and constantly change the value.

On Usury

In the previous posting on this subject, we noted that it seems to be a part of human nature that people like to be useful and engage in productive activity.  The Great Reset and similar proposals, however, appear to be far more concerned with meeting people’s material needs by any means necessary, with no attention paid to whether or people become productive and useful.

On Utility

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, it is not enough, even in materialist terms, just to see that people have enough to ensure their material wellbeing.  Human beings also want to be useful and productive.

JTW Podcast: Louis Kelso on the Harold Channer Show

Last week we featured an interview of Dr. Robert H.A. Ashford of the University of Syracuse School of Law on binary economics.  This week we have something even better: another interview from the Harold Channer Show, but this one is with the “Father of Binary Economics,” Louis O. Kelso:

News from the Network, Vol. 14, No. 14

Most of the world seems to be spinning its wheels trying to figure out how to turn the old abnormal into the new normal, when the pandemic has revealed the cracks in the system that prevent the new normal from being any better than the old abnormal. . . .

Property, Power and Production

In the previous posting on this subject, we looked briefly at the “Great Reset” and similar proposals and contrasted them with the demands of human dignity.  The basic idea seems to be that everyone should have “enough,” and that the system should be reorganized to provide it.  As far as many people today are concerned, the main problem is how to get what people need directly into the hands of the people who need it.

The Demands of Human Dignity

All things, as Aristotle said in the beginning of the Nichomachean Ethics, seek the good.  If someone seeks evil, it is because he either has the wrong idea of what is good, or is trying to avoid a greater evil.  The former is called a badly formed conscience and must be corrected through education and example.