The Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate has published a draft of the document "Economy in the context of globalization. Orthodox ethical view. " This document demonstrates the key positions of the Russian Church on a number of issues relating to the economy and international relations.…Not to be outdone by the pope.
Katehon (not the document): The unconditional support of state sovereignty against the transnational elite is a distinctive feature of the position of the Orthodox Church. This differs the Orthodox from Catholics, who are members of the globalist transnational centralized structure, in contrast to the Orthodox Churches, which are united in faith, but not administratively.…
This document is very important because it shows that the Russian Orthodox Church not only occupies a critical position in relation to the liberal globalization, but also offers a Christian alternative to globalization processes. While Catholics and most Protestant denominations have passionate humanist ideas, and in the best case, criticize globalization from the left or left-liberal positions, the Russian Orthodox Church advocate sovereignty and national identity. The most important aspect of the Orthodox critique of globalization is the idea of multipolarity and the destructiveness of modern Western civilization’s path.Where the two Churches agree is on distributism.
The following catechism on selfishness appeared in an article titled "Serious Questions of the Hour" in the November 1874 Shaker and Shakeress Monthly. A large portion of it was quoted in Richard T. Ely's The Labor Movement in America (1886). I have reformatted the text, breaking questions and answers into separate paragraphs.…Econospeak
As I’ve pointed out before, people misread Locke as if he is some kind of hardcore absolute propertarian, but he simply isn’t.
In the very first sentence of his treatment of property, Locke cites to Psalm 115:16 and remarks that “it is very clear, that God … has given the earth to the children of men; given it to mankind in common.” Locke reaffirms that the earth belongs to everyone in common over and over again in the ensuing paragraphs: “God, who hath given the world to men in common”, “the fruits it naturally produces, and beasts it feeds, belong to mankind in common”, “the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men,” etc.
That Locke says everything belongs to everyone is not surprising, as it would have been a massive break with Christian tradition to say otherwise.
From the starting point that the entire world is owned in common, Locke then argues for creating and respecting property institutions as being instrumentally valuable for administrating the use of the collectively-owned earth. He notes that, although the world belongs to everyone, it is intended that people “make use of it to the best advantage of life, and convenience” and “for the support and comfort” of human beings. Accordingly, “there must of necessity be a means to appropriate” the earth to mobilize its resources towards these ends.
So, on the abstract normative framework level, Locke’s view is that the world belongs to human beings in common, that we need some mechanism to allow for the utilization of its resources, and that a propertarian system “might” serve that instrumental end. If this seems familiar to you, it’s because that’s the Thomist view, which, again, was fairly prevalent at the time.Demos Policy Shop
Locke’s other writings on resource rights make this all very clear. In addition to the famous Lockean Proviso (which requires that property cannot be appropriated unless there is enough left in common for others), Locke straightforwardly claims that the poor have a right to the “property” of the rich:Seem that John Locke was more of a socialist than Pope Francis. Who knew?God, the lord and father of all has given no one of his children such a property in his peculiar portion of the things of this world, but that he has given his needy brother a right to the surplusage of his goods, so that it cannot justly be denied him when his pressing wants call for it, and therefore, no man could ever have a just power over the life of another by right of property in land or possessions, since it would always be a sin in any man of estate to let his brother perish for want of affording him relief out of his plenty.If ever there was a clearer call for the right of redistribution, I haven't seen it. And, of course, this too was the prevailing Christian thought on this matter at the time. Locke's musings on property have acquired a radical character more so from anachronistic misreads and half-reads than what Locke actually wrote.
So what are Brat's economic beliefs? Well, he's focused on, to his mind, two related questions: why rich countries are so rich, and what ethics has to do with economics. Let's look at them both....
In short, Brat thinks that culture matters—and so does ethics. Now, that's not a word you hear economists use very much nowadays, but Brat points out that they used to....I agree with this in principle, although I disagree with Brat on the details. Suppressing the normative and prescriptive content of assumptions in order to appear more positive and science-like is disingenuous or ignorant.
...according to Brat, that unlike economists today, Smith "knew that the world of thought must be unified"—that "positive analysis and normative analysis must meet in the end." In other words, Brat thinks economists have to get back to telling us how to live, and not just how to live efficiently. Or at least be explicit about it, so we can judge whether we like the ethics behind their economics.
The Organization Man is bestselling book by William H. Whyte, originally published by Simon & Schuster in 1956.[1]It is considered one of the most influential books on management ever written.[2]The idea of the organization man is now out of favor in management, which is now emphasizing integrating individual creativity into team work. The American workplace has changed drastically from the Fifties.
While employed by Fortune Magazine, Whyte did extensive interviews with the CEOs of major American corporations such as General Electric and Ford.[3] A central tenet of the book is that average Americans subscribed to a collectivistethic rather than to the prevailing notion of rugged individualism. A key point made was that people became convinced that organizations and groups could make better decisions than individuals, and thus serving an organization became logically preferable to advancing one's individual creativity. The author felt this was counterfactual and listed a number of examples of how individual work and creativity can produce better outcomes than collectivist processes. He observed that this system led to risk-averse executives who faced no consequences and could expect jobs for life as long as they made no egregious missteps.
Thomas Cahill: Conservatives are afraid of pope’s ‘pure Christianity,’ not ‘pure Marxism’ (via Raw Story )
Muslim scholar Reza Aslan: Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin would call Jesus a ‘Marxist’ (via Raw Story )
Pope Francis describes ‘ideological Christians’ as a ‘serious illness’ within the Church (via Raw Story )Ok, what the hell do these two hobby horses of mine have to do with one another? What bearing does the non-existence of God have on economics generally and monetary theory in particular? When you put it like that, basically none. And yet, I think the are reasons to expect that the online atheist community could be more receptive than others to MMT's central message, and might even be well-positioned to help spread the message around. The case for MMT can easily be tailored to appeal to atheists (especially progressive atheists already dismayed and embarrassed by the prevalence of lazy libertarian cant within the community). Atheists can be co-opted into the MMT cause by pointing out how MMT can be an enormous help in achieving important goals of the atheist community, especially in terms of expanding public funding for scientific research projects....The Daily Drew
Right-wing Christian: Liberals are the real theocrats because they want to help the poor (via Raw Story )A Facebook question from a Bismark, North Dakota resident to his congressman started off rockily yesterday, when the congressman dismissed a religious argument opposed to cuts in the federal food stamp program with a religious quote.
“2 Thessalonians 3:10 English Standard Version (ESV) 10 For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat,” Congressman Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) posted in reply Friday afternoon to an inquiry from Kevin Tengesdal, a Bismark-based actor and activist....
The quote Cramer used in reply to Tengesdal is an admonition against Christians failing to plant seed and harvest food because anticipation of the imminent return of Christ might seemingly make that toil unnecessary. [Not to mention that a majority of New Testament scholars do not accept 2 Thessalonians as authentically Pauline.]
Ironically, Cramer’s North Dakota district received $10.4 billion in agricultural subsidies from the U.S. Department of Agriculture from 2005 to 2012 — the single largest recipient of farm subsidies in the nation.The Raw Story
Catholic website says colleges aren’t for women: ‘Learn to be a wife and mother’ (via Raw Story )
IRS faces lawsuit for failing to enforce church electioneering ban (via Raw Story )Findings from the 2013 Economic Values Survey by the Public Religion Research Institute and Governance Studies at BrookingsBrookings
"Through your joyful witness and service, help to build a civilization of love. Show, by your life, that it is worth giving your time and talents to attain high ideals," Francis said at the Rio airport before he departed for Rome....
"Bringing the Gospel is bringing God's power to pluck up and break down evil and violence, to destroy and overthrow the barriers of selfishness, intolerance and hatred, so as to build a new world," he said.Many young people in Brazil saw this as his support for peaceful demonstrations to bring about social and political reform....
Francis dedicated much attention in his speeches to the problems, the prospects and the power of youth....
The pope addressed Latin American bishops before leaving Brazil, telling them the Church had to shed all elitism and get closer to the people....
Many young people in Brazil saw this as his support for peaceful demonstrations to bring about social and political reform...
On Friday night he called on them to change a world where food is discarded while millions go hungry, where racism and violence still affront human dignity, and where politics is more associated with corruption than service
The day before, during a visit to a Rio slum, he urged them not to allow their hopes of change to be extinguished. Many young people in Brazil saw this as his support for peaceful demonstrations to bring about social and political reform.Reuters
Archbishop: Right wing of the church not happy about Pope Francis (via Raw Story )
