One thing we’ve
noticed about a number of proposed reform packages is that all too frequently
the desired goal is stated as the means instead of the end. This tends to get almost simple minded at
times. If you want something, just do
it. How
to do it is an unimportant detail.
Take, for
example, the goal of “the Distributist State,” a condition of society
characterized by widespread capital ownership, with a preference for small,
family-owned farms and artisan businesses.
It surprises many people (especially today’s distributists and
Chestertonians) when they discover that Chesterton never suggested any means to
establish and maintain the Distributist State.
 |
| "G.K., you're driving me nuts!" |
This drove George
Bernard Shaw to distraction. Fabian
socialism (which Shaw espoused) had more or less specific techniques to bring
about socialism, which Shaw and quite a few others defined in such a way as to
make it sound consistent with what Chesterton said about distributism. The Fabians were, in fact, at times focused
more on means than on ends, which caused rifts with H.G. Wells, Arthur Penty,
Major Douglas, a number of others (including Cecil Chesterton), and
(eventually) R.H. Tawney, all of whose approaches didn’t quite match up with
the Fabian program.
Consequently,
Shaw couldn’t understand why Chesterton and Belloc, who were focused on ends
rather than means (and who thus rejected the Fabian orientation that the end
justifies the means), simply wouldn’t agree that distributism is the same as
socialism . . . and completely missing the point when Chesterton told him why:
socialism, Fabian or otherwise, simply was not consistent with his philosophy. During one informal debate soon after
Chesterton converted to Catholicism (another thing that ticked Shaw off, and
for which Shaw unjustly blamed Belloc) GBS became so angry that he stomped out
of the house where they had met by chance one evening.
 |
| "Mind if I outline a little history for you?" |
(Don’t be fooled,
however. Unlike some of the Fabians,
Shaw and H.G. Wells could disagree with Chesterton on just about everything —
sometimes almost to the point of screaming at him — and still remain friends. When Chesterton died, Shaw immediately asked
Frances, Chesterton’s wife, if she needed anything — especially money — and
kept an eye on her.)
That is why the “vehicles”
for ownership democratization are a key element in Capital Homesteading: they
are both practical and consistent with fundamental moral principles; means and
ends are in conformity with each other:
The “Capital
Homestead Account” or “CHA” is the primary tax-sheltered vehicle for
the democratization of capital credit through local banks. It would enable
every child, woman, and man to accumulate wealth and receive dividend incomes
from newly issued shares in new and growing companies, without being taxed on
the accumulations (including property and shares gained through inheritance,
savings, and arrangements like ESOPs, CSOPs and CLBs). In addition to serving
as a source of capital credit for corporate workers, CHAs would also provide an
ownership-building account for individuals who do not work for profit-making
enterprises, such as school teachers, civil servants, military personnel,
police, and health workers, and for individuals who have no remunerative
employment, such as the disabled, the unemployed, homemakers and children.
 |
| "Forget socialism, guys. Try capital ownership." |
The “Citizens
Land Bank” or “CLB” [also known as the for-profit Citizens Land
Cooperative (CLC) or Community Investment Corporation (CIC)] allows residents
of a community to share in the control and profits associated with land
planning and development. The CLB would encourage governments at all levels
(from the community to the highest governmental level) as well as non-profit
entities, to distribute the ownership of land and natural resources free to all
citizens. This would encourage citizens to participate in development so they
can share in planning, governance and lease incomes from the use of land and
natural resources.
The “Employee
Stock Ownership Plan” or “ESOP” channels low-cost credit for
financing the needs of business corporations (such as expansion, capitalization
and ownership transfers), and links private sector workers to ownership shares
and dividend incomes in the companies for which they work. Shares acquired on
credit by worker-owners are paid for out of the future corporate profits they
help to generate.
The “Consumer
or Customer Stock Ownership Plan” or “CSOP” lets customers of
utilities share in the governance and profitability of “natural monopolies,”
like telecommunications, water and power companies, mass-transit and cable
television.
Tomorrow we’ll
look at some of the policy objectives of Capital Homesteading.
#30#
