Karl Marx and Millennials
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- Today, we discuss a recent article in Teen Vogue titled "Who is Karl Marx?", which shows how many teens and teachers have begun dabbling in Marxism. There have been a slew of other articles noting the rise of millennials supporting socialism. Having done my masters work in philosophy on Karl Marx, I introduce this influential thinker and his main ideas, noting the problems the Catholic Church has with them.
NOTE: Do you like this podcast? Become a patron and get some great perks for helping, like free books, bonus content, and more. Word on Fire is a non-profit ministry that depends on the support of our listeners…like you! So be part of this mission, and join us today: / bishopbarron
![Cody Johnson - I'm Gonna Love You (with Carrie Underwood) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yy9PuYMU29g/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm learning more from this Catholic priest than from any political science professor i had in college.
People's Bishop!
@@marypinakat8594 true!
@@johnelmerpechuela3519
☆
@@ragejinraver
It's high time that you guys think up some ways and make Michael Voris a Bishop or someone. (Very poor that yourself don't possess the intelligence and maybe the interest to find out the truth about what Bishop Barron spoke about people in hell.) If Bishop Barron was so much a bad element in the Church and life of the Catholics do you ever think that the Church wouldn't have dealt with the issue. *Why should YOU do something here in the comments section of a RUclips video?*
BTW what is your understanding of Christian virtues, those that help us get us to Heaven?
@@desperado77760
In my opinion you ought to simply stay away.
Little known fact: Karl Marx had a sister who invented the starter pistol. Her name was Anya.
This comment need more likes.
Good joke. Had to double check it.
Love your videos. you and Father Mike Schmitz actually led me back to my Catholic faith. Thank you for these videos!
same here! He and Father Mike!
It’s doing the same for me too!
This is a silly comment, but I think this is the first time I've seen Bishop Barron rocking short sleeves.
That's how you know he's getting serious.
Well, not exactly short sleeves, but rolled-up sleeves
Wearing short sleeves and a Roman collar at the same time just feels off.
@@ToxicPea It is Summer and it is hot weather.
This is the most controversial comment in this entire comment section 👀
You should totally do a second part of this! It was so interesting to listen to this message as a young Catholic.
"But in Europe, in the nineteenth century, the two models were joined by a third, socialism, which quickly split into two different branches, one totalitarian and the other democratic. Democratic socialism managed to fit within the two existing models as a welcome counterweight to the radical liberal positions, which it developed and corrected. It also managed to appeal to various denominations. In England it became the political party of the Catholics, who had never felt at home among either the Protestant conservatives or the liberals. In Wilhelmine Germany, too, Catholic groups felt closer to democratic socialism than to the rigidly Prussian and Protestant conservative forces. In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctrine and has in any case made a remarkable contribution to the formation of a social consciousness." - Pope Benedict XVI
Monarchy is the Catholic government
There was never a democratic Socialism in Europe. Scandinavia is free market Capitalism with generous welfare programs where poor also pay taxes.
Pope Benedict means usurpation of the real Solution over worldliness is easy to expose in socialists that we really have to Focus on Christ bringing us all Towards Our FATHER:FOCUS Of Adoration of Jesus' Christians
Thank you Bishop Barron, without your direction many of us would be lost
sheeple
21:40 What I've seen is that young people see the material goodness of charity (as in "donations/work") but don't connect that idea with the actual definition of charity, which is love! They'd rather have a faceless, loveless government bureau do their "charity" for them, and they don't realize how counter this is to real charity.
Thank you, Bishop Barron. We need Catholic leaders who are willing to tackle the hard topics and really understand them.Your calm and logical critiques are a blessing in this age of seemingly growing division.
@@elizabethkraszewski6603 Eat bread today and you're still poor tomorrow. Better than nothing but it's not enough, and it's not better than crushing the capacity for real charity. I don't know what you mean by effective.
@Elizabeth Kraszewski Problem is that government is not «efficient.» Everything government does is wasteful. Nothing government does tends to just go to fix a problem.
Take feeding the poor. Charities feed the poor, but they don’t tend to have motives other than the benefit of the poor, to include teaching the poor to lift themselves out of poverty. so, they actually do feed the poor.
So, feed the poor, yes! However, government activity doesn’t end there. Government has no limits on its mission of feeding the poor. All sorts of « clients » are also created, when government feeds the poor, who‘s livelihood now depends on government «feeding the poor»: From the bureaucrats who disburse the funding that feeds the poor, to the politician who runs for office promising more government benefits to the poor, besides food. All the poor, and the bureaucrats, and all the others who now depend on the government feeding the poor, have to do is just vote for them.
Somehow, when all is considered, many of the poor do not even get fed. Certainly, very few of the poor ever rise out of poverty, and the only «poor people» who really do well, at the government’s feeding of the poor, are those who administer the programs, provide the wherewithal to feed the poor-and the politicians who get re-elected over, and over-because of their love for the poor.
No! Government is not the most efficient way to feed the poor. Government is thé least efficient way to feed the poor.
@@alevan5714 correction yes it is. Acting as if Charities themselves don't have beaurucracies, you need them sometimes fro proper organisation. The welfare system of the 1950s helped moved so many people out of poverty and the social welfare helped keep so many people out of poverty than any charity ever has. And if you're scared of a state that becomes too powerful and has ulterior motives then keep making sure that it stays democratic and follows the will of the people
@Nick Chris What you are talking about is the era when government gave actual food to «the poor.». I grew up in the fifties, I’m 76 years old, and one of the government contributions to rescuing the poor I remember is men, pulling up to food distribution posts in trucks,and loading cartons of cheese, and bologna and butter into them, and driving away. It was a big joke in my neighborhood.
Nobody was rescued from poverty, by the government, where I lived. Everyone I know, who made it out of the neighborhood either did well in school (I even knew an older kid who got a scholarship to Penn State). Most of my neighbors who went on to college went to Temple University. Everyone else either worked in the local factory (ACF BRILL -until it shut down), or repaired autos, or became carpenters, or stone masons, some even became burglars-and spent as much of their lives in prison as they did on the street. One fellow I grew up with became a maffioso and ended his career wrapped in a rug on a trash pile in the local dump.
All of us went into either the Army or the Marines. I don’t remember anyone joining the Navy. Now, that government activity helped a lot of us.
I know it helped me. I learned to be punctual, and to complete a job. It took a couple of years for the NCOs to knock the street out of me, but they did, and I ended re-enlisting.
.
My view of the poverty situation is, of course, limited to my neighborhood and my personal memories. I don’t remember the government getting anyone out of poverty. Obviously, however, I have a more limited view than you do.
@@alevan5714 I'm glad we agree, no one said that the system was well done or perfect everywhere. I'm talking from general statistics. The safety nets provided as well as reduced public housing benefited a lot of people and helped them from falling into poverty
What a smart, informative, and entertaining video. This had it all. And to better understand Jesus at the end. Bravo! Thank you Bishop Barron and Brandon!
God Bless You, Bishop Barron!
I’m a philosophy major. Expected this to be far worse than it was. This was excellent. Nice synopsis Bishop.
Catholic priests typically study theology, and/or philosophy, at a university level, there is such a misconception that Catholic clergy does not understand academia.
Totally wish I could sit through a lecture by you Bishop!
Possible. Join the wof institute
Hope Bishop makes you more focused in Christ's Our FATHER
I think it was Irving Berlin that quiped "The world would not be in such a snarl if Marx had been born Groucho instead of Karl".
I love it!!
Bishop Barron impresses me every time i listen to him
*Millenials and the Church: A Conversation with Fr. Daniel Horan*
ruclips.net/video/DNl9XcMXrZI/видео.html
I am a Marxist, a Groucho Marxist.
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” - Groucho Marx
GOD Will Tell you HE is FATHER ... (marx does not know)
It's a bit concerning that Bishop Barron, when asked why young people today are dabbling in Marxism, doesn't mention the changes in the economy in recent decades like stagnant wages, job insecurity, a exponential rise in wealth inequality and policies crafted to benefit the rich over the middle class. Instead he more or less dismisses it as typical of youth and naivety. Btw I say this as a Catholic and as a fan of Bishop Barron!
Yeah, but you really think those are valid reasons for opting for Marxism!?
Maybe, maybe not. I think some of the ideas have merit, others don't. All I'm saying is they're probably the reasons behind the recent spike in interest in Marx.
Doesn't evil breed evil? Perhaps we need some more legal/moral constraints to deal with rising wealth inequality, for example, as this definitely would lead some people to say that capitalism isn't working and why not give Marxism a try. I personally understand, but don't necessarily agree, how a current American style market economy would create the idea that we need to abandon it. It is horribly unfair and oppressive to millions and has resulted in famine, war, and suffering for decades.
I gotta question the narrative here. Would millenials trade places with people born 40, 50, 60 years ago? If it's so bad now I'd like to hear about it on a platform that didn't even exist 25 yrs ago where we interact on devices that were science fiction 30 years ago and we live in air conditioned comfort that not even kings could find 100 years ago and moving around in cars that last 3 and 4 times as long as any car made in 1970.
How about Venezuela and Cuba? People have food rations there, as well as, North Korea. Wake up
You should address Henry George. If you are not familiar with him, a great introduction would be his "The Condition of Labor: An Open Letter to Pope Leo XIII" written as a direct response to "Rerum Novarum."
I'm not sure how many have seen the news, but there was an event in Poland. Jacob Baryla is a Polish youth that protested against a gay parade but there has been much backlash on Polish Catholics. I think we should start an novena to Our Lady of Victory up and till October 13. That's Poland's 2019 parliamentary election. We really should aid this country that still has a Catholic soul.
maybe dont protest a gay pride parade like an idiot?
@@theswoletariat3479 ha, too late. He is free to, and he did so with love in his heart and his actions, peacefully.
@@theswoletariat3479 focus is never on "idiotic" pride .... but ... on Dignity of Christ as Everlasting Father (Isaiah 9:6) then all "government/s" (that usurp/s His Own) will be Perfected Functional From Providence By Our Eternal FATHER
Thank You bishop Barron. I like how explained the Church's position in regards to Marxism. It's one of the dangers we encounter. I usually say there is a danger of two extremes. You explained the dangers not only of Marxism but also in our own market economy when it comes to greed. You highlight the benefits of a Market economy and at the same time point out the dangers. We should read about the Church's social teaching so we don't get caught up flawed philosophies
.
I tried to plow through Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit" once but could not get over the impression that his language sounded like he was on LSD.
Bishop Barron, thank you for this, and for all of the videos you've posted.
Could you please invite Jordan Peterson? You both a great! A special about GK Chesterton would be great as well! Please and Thank you.
Peterson is garbage
Just printed off Rerum Novarum and Centesimus Annus from the Vatican’s website
This is THE TRUTH and nothing but the truth...GOD bless father Barron!!!
This is excellent as usual. I would love to see Bishop Barron’s analysis of Marxism in regard to present social and political struggle.
I don't think Marx thought that alienation would lead to revolution. Instead it would be various class antagonisms, like the conflict between wages and surplus value. His writings on alienation was a social aspect arising out of the divisions of labor.
Most of the reforms to capitalism were due mostly in part to militant union strikes that were often violent. So, Marx was not wrong on this front, and social democracy was the synthesis. Since the class antagonisms did not stop there, it makes sense that class conflicts would rise again.
What millennials are seeing is that social democracies around the world are being unraveled, and the only way to end the conflicts between the classes are to transition into an economic system that ends the class divides. Now there are many ways to do this, and a violent revolution is not the only one. Neither, was the USSR indicative of all socialist economic organization, and it's seems odd to try and dispel Marxism using the genetic fallacy. Many Marxists opposed Stalin's regime. In fact, Orwell fought fascists with the POUM, and along side the anarcho-syndicalists.
As for Marx comments on religion, it doesn't seem to be an absolute. After all, Marx himself pulled much from religion in support of his writings, makes sense as he had a Jewish background, however I think he recognized religion could be weaponized against the proletariat. There have been many religious socialist movements, after all.
It also appears to me that Pope Leo seems to have been trying to maintain the status-quo, even Jesus' teachings often included common ownership as opposed to private ownership. So it doesn't seem too hard to synthesize Christianity with Marxism, and seems kind of patronizing to Catholic Marxists by implying they are not "True Catholics". Likewise, I'm sure the Catholics that supported the monarchy or fascism would make the same claim against Catholic Social Liberals.
Labor doesn't need capital, only under capitalism does this seem to be true. All labor needs is access to resources.
Marx is only one leftist thinker, and his contribution as a critic of capitalism is greatly under appreciated. However, there were many critics of Marx's writings as well. Most notably Max Stirner and Mikhail Bakunin.
I appreciate a more honest approach to Marxism than what conservatives would warrant, and I look forward to researching about Catholic Social Teaching. It would be interesting to see what your thoughts on the reemergence of fascism, and your opinion on the political center giving way to extreme polarization.
Very good comments, some disagreements but I'm mostly on board with you.
@Kevin Cobb full of fallacious appeals and not particulatly scriptural interprets of the faith.
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
Not necessarily an endorsement of bloodshed, but a rejection of appealing to the center/encouraging folding on values and using scripture as the authority for it.
@Kevin Cobb sure, this is only in relation to your first reply. I didn't read the whole exchange with the athiest. "Marx was just a man ... No reason to put so much trust in him." While true, it's a non-sequitur because it's irrelevant and true of literally any human examination/statement. No one has suggested a gospel-like adherence to Marx, especially not Marx himself. Kind of already framing your arguement as against something no one is saying.
Your second paragraph, comparing Marxism to a child seeking justice? It's not so simple, Marxism is a framework within which to analyze the class structure of capitalist society and prescribe a path to socialism. It is a lot more than a simple desire for justice. Many capitalists have that same desire, as well, but the path to justice is what constitutes an ism. Marxism is certainly not "utopian" it is a constant struggle to advance humanity, it is practically defined by it's adherence to struggle and constant reexamination. While Marx uses some poetic language he never denies that socialism is but a stage in development, like capitalism, towards an eventual perfection of human society. I do not know any serious Marxists who envision a utopia for themselves or even their great-grandchildren. Much like Jordan Peterson and his attacks on non-existent "post modern Marxists" (marxism is moral absolutist and dialectical both of which are incompatible with post-modernism) "Utopian" is a commonly cast attack against it by those who either have not studied it from primary sources, or by those who seek to misdefine it and sew confusion. Unsurprisingly, in capitalist society most easily accessible secondary and tertiary sources on socialism seek to miseducate. Don't rely on a declared adversary to honestly inform you on the thing they seek to destroy.
The following segment, is what in particular bothered me. An appeal to the center? Why is the truth in the center? Jesus didn't say that, he explicitly warns against compromise with the unjust and assumptions that "truth" is found in some relation to the masses rather than in Him. He says he did not come to bring unity but a sword. He says to take up your cross, and that it would divide father and son, mother and daughter, brother and sister; that people will hate you but you MUST speak the message and not seek agreement just to appease. Appeals to the center are just intellectually lazy.
The underlying spirits and purposes that cause men to behave unjustly are kind of the bread and butter of a Marxist analysis. They blame very little on the person and attribute nothing to stereotype (you can find many notable exceptions to this, because people are flawed and racism or xenophobia are some of our easiest base urges to engage.) because they see the material conditions of a society as dictating how we are socialized and encouraged to act. For example, many people claim capitalism is "human nature" and that we could never have socialism because of greed. But greed is not inherent to us. Veering back to theology, greed is a sin and thus is us failing to act on our true nature to follow God. It's a *lapse* of our nature. Marx, while an athiest, also sees greed as a lapse of true human nature. It's sad that this is the go-to retort against socialism from my fellow Christians. Pre-capitalist history and allegorical example will often bear this out. We're compelled to generosity our brains reward generosity, our faith rewards generosity, throughout history; including biblical times the unproductive are cared for thru societal organizations that make available the basic resources of the era. I think its Samuel (maybe Ruth? Somewhere around there) where we see that the privileged were *mandated* not advised to leave some of their crop unfilled for the widowed and infirm. But our material conditions are competition for resources and a capitalist society that often punishes generosity (because your generosity robs a capitalist of profit, and they are the ruling class.) Doubt that? Try to organize a shelter for the homeless, or feed the needy without giving most of your resources to some corporate entity because of myriad rules and regs that ban home cooked/grown foods. There are some valid reasons for that sure, but it's easier to SELL than GIVE food for a reason. (I've helped organize many services for the needy, the recently incarcerated, and the addicted.) The reason is that the dominant ideology is Capitalism and capitalism requires a surplus army of labor; people desperate enough for work to always push wages down and the presumption that no one is owed dignity or self-determination just for being a Child of God. The threat of starvation and homelessness must exist for that debasement and desperation. We're told that's our nature, but it hasn't always been. Sure, there's always been struggle there always will be, and socialism will not end struggle; but the full cultural normalization of neglect of responsibility for others and the dogged individual competition of our time are outliers.
Disclaimer: not a "Marxist" but I value many marxist/marxian observances/critiques of capitalism. Like that socialism proceding from capitalism is as necessary and inevitable as capitalism proceeding from feudalism. I'm a Catholic who thinks we should make our investigations into history and philosophy and view whatever aligns itself with injustice very skeptically. I observe most (but not all) people, particularly my brother-Christians to buy too easily into the prevailing narrative and ignore that capitalism is motivated by greed when told to by capitalists. I think, given the Gospel, Christians should be amongst the most vocal critics of capitalism's faults and how it pushes individuals into sin and depravity; notably hedonism, decadence, wars of greed and conquest, greed, and disharmony among men. I see that many socialists are hostile to religion because it so quickly sides with the established worldly authority and fails to actually struggle for it's virtues in a meaningful way. They're right to see many of us as hypocrites and we should do better. We offer our crumbs to the needy but rarely live in service, we go to church to offset that and often read gospels that condemn the rich, prohibit hoarding wealth while the poor starve, and yet we go home and support a system that literally runs on and requires that inequality. One that puts individual wealth above our brothers and sisters, and above God. This leaves us as hypocrites tying ourselves to a system that doesn't represent what we claim to uphold while atheists build the future with plans to suppress us for our aligning with the past.
Kyle Brown - One ought guard against comparing the idealism of a particular system with the reality of another. Socialism/Communism has not provided us with any meaningful and successful working models and the less said on what has been attempted the better. One of the obvious failings of Socialism/Communism is that it does not account for the benefits of competition without which many of our great discoveries and inventions would not have been realized. For analogy, think sport, remove its competitiveness and it will soon become dreary and boring if not meaningless.
Edit: not all men or capitalists are driven by greed. Many Capitalists are great philanthropists.
Daniel Paul - My post was actually intended for Kyle Brown but not to disappoint you I will have this final thing to say to you - You have not noted my first bit of advice. Nor have you attempted to address the need for us humans to compete, an evolutionary trait no doubt. When considering inventions/discoveries, think beyond the iPhone or any other fashionable gadget. Also, we should not label ourselves “workers”, we are not bees or ants but rather we are men, men that work. Sport was given as an analogy, not as a necessary activity for man.
Bishop Barron I would like one day to translate it into Spanish to be able to share it
I think there is a feature where you can create subtitles for someone else's video if they activate it
El Obispo Barron tiene muy Buenos puntos para reflexionar pidamos que nuestros propios Obispos agan Al parecido ya que somos ignorantes en muchas cosas
great idea, maybe even a group of people willing to translate, across many languages.
Fray Nelson Medina. You want to watch Fray Nelson Medina's video on Fatima. He elegantly destroys marxism. I think Fray Nelson and Bishop Barron should have a beer... or a cup of coffee.
Pax et Gratia Christi Tibi, Pater.
I was wondering if you could do a few videos on The Orthodox Faith?
I second that!
@@m-hayek1985 I'm confused as to your comment. I was merely asking if he could talk about the orthodox church, in my view the true holders of apostolic succession. As to the schism jab, I'd like to point out the Pope was the one who overstepped his power. So I'd say to you, madame, that it is Rome that is the schismatic church
@@m-hayek1985 that's like asking how the council of Nicea is ecumenical.... ecumenical just means in regards to many Christian churches.
@@m-hayek1985 you do know what the council of Nicea is right? It's the council that compiled the bible. How is that binding? Well if you dont think the council is binding you dont have a bible, so to call it anything but ecumenical ie to renounce Scripture. www.oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/doctrine-scripture/sources-of-christian-doctrine/the-councils
@@m-hayek1985 but in addition to all this, why the hostility? I merely asked a question for the Bishop.
Great and necessary speech. Now I am 45 yrs old and I lived my first 15 yrs under comunism in Romania. I was practicly a kid but I still remember the monstrous system, the "gray air" you have to breath and live in everyday, and the killings of inocent people during the end of 1989...I do not have enough space here but let me give you an example of the sistem (might sound funny but it wasn't)
One year if you wanted to buy a book from the storebook, you also had to buy frozen fish...weird? Yeah, sure, but why you might ask? Because in that year the Comunist Party decided that the country had to fish a lot, and by the end of that year was a huge amount of fish not sold...so, the fish should be sold somehow.
You have to understand that in comunism the Party decides everything, everytime, in every area no matter how intimate or not.
TELL EVERYONE..MARXISM IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE BRINGING!
I am telling everyone...marxism is what Godless people are bringing
They have to be Godless...because GOD CLEARLY WILLS FREE WILL...AND THEY WANT TO TAKE IT AWAY! That alone is anti-God!
That's scary. Won't thrive and survive even for a day in a communist state. I'd surely fight for my freedom.
Cristi Halalau Hi we have seen the results and read about the communist regime under Mao. A lot of Chinese people displaced, hunger, poverty, no initiative (why would I work? Who would I work for? ) No private property, no heating in cold winters, no light at night, up to two families living in one little room, no sanitary conditions. Religious persecution. No education. I could go on and on. Those are the results of communist thinking. We should all be interested in history and politics, so we can make appropriate choices. No system is perfect, but I would prefer the free market system over any system. It is up to us make changes for improvements, but we don’t need necessarily throw a fundamentally good system away, just because there are some things we don’t like. Really liked the interview. It is important we speak about those topics. Thank you.
I wish I was as smart as Bishop Barron
The most important question we should ask is HOW justice is established.
Marx was a Deadbeat who never had a Hard days work in his whole life P.S. am a Millennial & I don't support Socialism in anyway.
JayDee284 I’m in the same boat
I love a good over generalization.
@TheBeybladeSport the Far left going to have a hard time once that part of History comes too light lol.
@@tornay131 Tell me about it most ppl my age I know Hate SJW's & think Socialism is a Con Job so I don't know where these Polls come from its just like when Gen X's where all viewed as pot smoking Morons back in the day.
Yet, you listen to tool and Bill Hicks? There’s hope for you.
Bishop Baron, you should debate Richard Wolff on Marxism. He had a great debate with the free-market libertarian Gene Epstein. He seems very open to discussing with those of differing views and makes convincing arguments. I'm sure the two of you could make a very fruitful engaging discussion.
Very, very good teaching...Thank you very much for sharing!
*Millenials and the Church: A Conversation with Fr. Daniel Horan*
ruclips.net/video/DNl9XcMXrZI/видео.html
A most interesting video. As a Protestant Christian, I cannot doubt Barron's sincerity, however it is difficult to support the Roman Catholic Church's belief in private property. Surely, the many people who will never be able to afford to purchase their own home, whether due to poverty, disability or unemployment, should not be told to "know their place" and to respect those who own property?
Worker cooperatives anyone?
There's nothing stopping people from organizing them here in the states.
Some exist already.
It's when people use the state to enforce them, and the abolition of private property, the marketplace, free movement, etc... then you get problems.
Very true. I don’t want the state involved in forcing this. I just prefer a free market of worker owned businesses with personal property rights upheld. That’s all.
"Right to first refusal" seems to be a decent economic policy being pushed by soft socialists. One of the problems cooperatives face is start up capital, and most banks do not loan to them. A state run bank could establish a loan program for them, and tax policies could favor them. After all, once established they last much longer than traditional enterprises.
I think modern China should remind us that the system of practices and assumptions that we call Capitalism has no political allegiance and no morality. To the first, we can already see multinational corporations positioning themselves to benefit from China's growing number of consumers. To the second, it's a system built on debt and credit, which seems at odds with the God who teaches us to forgive our debtors as we have been forgiven. This admonition in the Lord's prayer obviously has a spiritual dimension, but it has a here and now, flesh and blood aspect as well. It's a system in which endless acquisition is a "moral" imperative. After 9/11 one of the president's admonitions was to go shopping. Jesus is incessantly telling people to give up what they have in service of God and neighbor. Capitalism may be a necessary evil in the present age, but it is not Christian in any way that I can see.
The major problem is without capitalism, there is no good way to measure the economy and find out how to plan it. The rich like it because, then no one can see how much wealth they have.
Of course without religion and morals, and helping your fellow man everything collapses. Why help others according to their needs, grab as much as you can. Why work hard let others work for you.
Market Economy, I like that phrase now. Thanks Bishop Barron!
True It sounds better.
@GasconyKid why so grumpy?
Also called the free market system as apprised to the government or state controlled market system like Socialist/Communist China and North a Korea have now
"Market Economy" is the correct term. Marx chose to relabel it "Capitalism".
Bishop Robert Barron is reminiscent of Cardinal Fulton Sheen and Apostle Paul..... Although my first degree in Catholic Theology, I find myself discovering nuances on both the Social Doctrine of the Church as well as on Systematic Theology.....
Perhaps it might be worthwile to create a video that dissects the differences between socialism vs. democratic socialism vs. social democracy? Your Excellency, while you did preface by saying it might sound a bit patronizing, I was still a bit taken aback by reminding us that communism was an atrocious system. I don't think (at least I hope not) many in the younger generation who dabble with Marx and socialism are in favour of a Soviet style government controlling the entire means of production, but more so social democracy or democratic socialism. I would call myself a social democrat, and I think such a system fits well with what the Church would prescribe in terms of a just system (very similar to those reforms you describe at 19:10).
Can I also just say you've helped me so much in terms of navigating not only the faith in general, but also this particular aspect of the market and how the Church analyzes such a situation.
Seizing the means is not really any different from a capitalist monopoly type overlord, except that it’s the government so they can legislate their own rules as well.
A market economy which answers to democratically appointed government which serves the people’s well-being
The workers control the means, not the government. The only difference between socialism and what we have now is that the excess profits created by businesses would go to the workers rather than owners and shareholders. Do your research
Not sure if this will make it up the pipeline but thought I'd comment anyway. Question for Bishop Barron: You say that the formenting of a class struggle is to be avoided, but Marx asserts that the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat are already and always in a class struggle - in the sense that value comes from surplus labor value - thus exploiting the working class. Therefore to avoid engaging in class struggle in a Marxist framework is to be complicit or a victim of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie (the fact that the state represents the bourgeoisie along with the super and substructure). Also, as a disclaimer I am a Catholic Revolutionary Marxist.
I was thinking the same thing... I think ultimately it derives from the fact that Jesus came to this earth to save men's souls, not to foment social revolution. Jesus did not say stop slavery, he said "treat your slaves well". The is simply because under fallen man's leadership, it is impossible for us to create a truly equal society where some do not have more wealth, prestige and power than others. If only because some people are born with higher intelligence and fewer physical disabilities than other, so they will always have a natural advantage and we can never fully adjust for this. So in your revolution, you'll end up overthrowing one exploitative dictatorship only to replace it with another one, which is exactly what has happened historically with Communism of course. See the thing is, man does not NEED wealth to be happy or spiritual... in fact the pursuit of wealth, even the pursuit of "equity" and "justice" often directly detracts from both. The bible tells us the poor have a special place in heaven. If one truly believes in their religion, then they shouldn't be encouraging anyone to chase wealth because it only corrupts. We should be praying for the wretched souls of the capitalists, because every dollar they make is pricing them out of heaven. On this earth those of us with less need to be patient, humble, at peace and always thankful for what we do have. That's the authentic Christian/Catholic way to model Jesus Christ, such that we become as close as possible to becoming Him. And when we do this, we ourselves become a form of God and the capitalists are the sad, powerless and hopeless ones to be truly pitied. We don't need a revolution to kill them here on earth. They are killing themselves in the afterlife, which is what actually matters.
well class struggle aways exist because of skill differential. this leads to inequality plus not all jobs are equal in hardness. in Capitalism Bourgeoisie has the hardest job because he manage the whole company that competes with another. He has manage lots of people. The problem is shortage of Bourgeoisie. another problem is shortage of capital to proletariat to have equal opportunity. also the risk of becoming an Bourgeoisie is high because you have risk wealth to create company which may go bankrupt. We call this people want to take the job of bourgeoisie an entrepreneur. also funneling wealth to produce more wealth is better than consumption. Because increasing production increase living standards of others.
@@spark300c I don't think your comment is persuasive:
1. Class struggle doesn't exist due to "skill differential," but (as the name suggests) because of classes. For example, being a slave and being a slaveowner required quite different skills, but the fact a successful slaveowner is good at, say, profitably exporting cotton isn't the reason the slave would be struggling against him.
2. Even if being a bourgeoisie was the "hardest job," that doesn't alter the fact that the interests of the bourgeoisie and those of the proletariat are fundamentally antagonistic.
3. Marx and his followers argue that capitalism's increasing productivity (and thus ability to "produce more wealth") unwittingly creates the material preconditions for socialism, and that capitalism will share the same fate as slavery and feudalism: these systems, productive in their time, became antiquated and were overthrown by rival classes.
@@IsmailofeRegime the problem before Feudalism you has capitalism. ancient capitalism to precise. The Last stage of Roman Empire imposed socialism to ensure enough resources for their armies. This lead to decline. When empire fell the non land owners need protection. So feudalism came to be. Feudalism decline when mid-evil Europe social economic development was high enough. The reason why class struggle is base on skill and difficulty. Marx veiw there are owners and labors. It very simplistic because ignore why different labors get paired differently. Marx ignores the concepts of job difficulty and difference in pay. The class struggle is all about the labors get fair pay and ensuring that top does not get over payed. When labor markets get really tight workers at bottom more likely to get a fair wage.
You should really talk about Chesterton and Belloc Distributism and another distributist philosophy called Scottish Social Credit
Tell me how our system isn’t a failure when those who work the hardest make the least and those who do the least make the most...That third generation coal miner in West Virginia, has all the sweat and toil of those who labored before him gotten him anywhere? What does he have to show for it, in the end? We are expected to work until our deaths and are told we are lazy if we don’t, while there are those who do nothing, living off of third and fourth generation wealth. We tell the poor to “get a job” while the oppressors live off of stock options and dividends, never working a day in their lives. We act like this is altruism. We act like this is America. Millennials are sick of working for nothing, while a capitalist makes 5x more money, simply off of their labor. The system has left a majority of Americans one step from homeless. This is indefensible, unless of course, you are one of those who do the least and benefit the most, like this preacher. Jesus started as a carpenter. How about you?
Speaking as someone who is in the category of one who works very hard for my living, I have no problem with people living off of wealth from former generations. You say that like it's a bad thing, but if I could work every day of my life and my kids wouldn't have to then I would go for that. Anyone would. I would hope they wouldn't be lazy with it, but you get the point without getting lost in the weeds. Also realize that a lot of people did work very hard to get to where they are. They deserve to enjoy what they've earned, at least to some extent, right?
This guy advocated for atheism the way theologians advocated for Christianity… why aren’t colleges addressing his biases more often?
This is a superb talk
I'd LOVE to see a discussion between Bishop Barron and Arthur Brooks. Please!
We've already had one: on Arthur's podcast.
@@BishopBarron That makes my day. Thanks! 👍😄
I am compelled to comment on what should be and is most important, ultimate ... Eternal
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote a book called Apricot Jam, Millennials need to read this. Millennials may want to reconsider Socialism.
Only Sacred Scripture will make you understand ... Eternal LIFE:LOVE
Is it about commies kiled billions of indian people in 19th century? Oh, I forgot, it were british imperialists. Sorry...
So, class-collaborationism? All I'm hearing is fascism. I'm sorry, but individual virtue won't negate class struggle, which is a very real material thing.
Young people want financial help with education and healthcare. That does not make them cimmunists. Listen to them.
Marx's poetry:
Heaven I would comprehend
I would draw the world to me;
Living, hating, I intend
That my star shine brilliantly …
. . .
… Worlds I would destroy forever,
Since I can create no world;
Since my call they notice never …
. . .
Then I will be able to walk triumphantly,
Like a god, through the ruins of their kingdom.
Every word of mine is fire and action.
My breast is equal to that of the Creator.
. . .
And in his poem "Invocation of One in Despair" Marx writes,
I shall build my throne high overhead
Cold, tremendous shall its summit be.
For its bulwark - superstitious dread
For its marshal - blackest agony.2
The Satan theme is most explicitly set forth in Marx's "The Fiddler," dedicated to his father:
See this sword?
the prince of darkness
Sold it to me.
. . .
With Satan I have struck my deal,
He chalks the signs, beats time for me
I play the death march fast and free.
Forgive me for saying so, but what a damned dog.
@BLACKBLADE 80 @BLACKBLADE 80 Marx had the psychology of a Shakespeare villain. He wants to destroy a world he cannot participate in. He wants to destroy the world he could never create. He accepts his evil and literally chooses to try and destroy the world through philosophy for the sake of his own vainglory . . . He wants to incite what Plato called "the great herd of humanity" to a violent and global insurrection. Like you said, it would be interesting if it were actually literature. But Marx is not and was not a poet. These are bad poems technically speaking: Real German poetry is Goethe and Hölderlin. What I mean is, this was not serious poetry to be published. This was Marx privately expressing his truly feelings-a journal, as it were.
It might be a good piece of writing for a dramatist to put in the mouth of a psychopath, but in reality I think Karl Marx is a man who simply chose to be an extremely evil man.
He also got a woman pregnant and forced his writing partner, Engels, to claim the child was his. In addition, Engels worked in a 19c. English factory to finance Marx's life back home. Most of the money was spent on keeping up the bourgeois lifestyle that was so so important to the real living Marx, who could never shut his gob about exploitation. Perhaps a case of BAD CONSCIENCE.
The way he portrays his opinions...
In a world where rolemodels to young people are "musicians", models, sportsmen... My rolemodel is bishop Barron.
how do we write the name of the book he reccomended to read instead of marx at minute 21:20?
I agree, Bishop, on what you are saying to the young people on here concerning the romanticism of socialism. I say this to my adult children about what I have been seeing in our culture developing in the past few decades little by little. For me, and others I know from my age group, it is a bit scary. We grew up during the Cold War; our parents even more so. There is nothing romantic about the mass murders of hundreds of million of people in the light of moving forward socialist/communist thinking and oppression. In my lifetime, I have met and known several people who survived the oppressive forces in their homeland countries where these political systems rose up. Some were removed as young people from their family, forced on marches into "re-training" camps, and submitted to horrible conditions while they were being brainwashed with Socialist/Communist thinking. Some saw family members murdered while sleeping in their beds. When they finally were able to escape to America, they told me they loved their country, but hated their country's government system. These horror stories from those I've known over the years have remained with me in my heart and soul. It is not something we ever want to see for the United States or any country for that matter! I pray it never goes that far!
Bishop Barron, your Excellency, are you aware or have you studied the works of Soren Kierkegaard? He attended lectures by Hegel along with Marx in the same hall, presumably. It is fascinating their trajectory, as both claimed that they were not Hegelians and sought to distance themselves from Hegel. It was Martin Heidegger, however, in his lecture, "Hegel and the Greeks," who made the point that indeed, despite their better wishes, Marx and Kierkegaard are the greatest Hegelians. I feel that Kierkegaard, like St. John Henry Newman, sought to reacue his countrymen in Denmark, as Newman saved his countrymen, from the great and powerful "liberalization" of the church. I believe that Catholic welcoming and study of Kierkegaard is sorely lacking and with his wealth of treasures, as perhaps the greatest thinker in the 19th century, so said Wittgenstein, his incorporation by the church should be a great mission as he is a powerful Evangelizer who ushered me to Christianity.
Thank you, Bishop, for reinvorgating the intellectual side of our Catholic brains!
I second this, would love to hear Bishop Barron talk about Kierkegaard.
I haven't read Heidegger's lecture, but am going to look it up. I assume (in SK's case) he would be talking about a dialectical view of the self? As far as I am aware, Kierkegaard was a very reactionary figure to Hegel's philosophy, as it demeaned the importance of the individual. Kierkegaard's focus on the self and the individual is so predominant throughout his work, that it might be a point of disconnect between him and Catholics. Not that the Church doesn't like the individual, but it's not an either/or situation, it's a both/and as Chesterton pointed out.
Ex: Monks and Nuns are individuals who lead an intense inner-life dedicated to contemplation and prayer, and at the same time live in a community of brothers/sisters bound by a Rule and vows who are also working on the same thing.
@ Epileptic
From what I have read, Kierkegaard's contemporaries were incredibly enamored with Hegel and imitated and adored him without full understanding. At first, Kierkegaard was one of those, but gradually became disillusioned with that interpretation of Hegel. It has now been postulated that most of Kierkegaard's critique is in fact leveled at Hegel's imitators, and that, in fact, Kierkegaard grew in his appreciated of the depth of Hegel's thought in later years.
But to your point of Kierkegaard's individualism, I would say this is a good question. I was just baptized into the RC church this past Easter, and, as Kierkegaard was essentially the writer to awaken the truth of Christianity to me, I tried to reconcile the author of Fear and Trembling, who showed that Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac was a willful act of faith that severed his ethical belonging to the community, with the RC church. In other words, faith is something deeply subjective to such an extant that it does sever our relationships to the Other others (i.e. our brothers and sister in Christ).
So Kierkegaard is indeed an intensely challenging figure when it comes to Christianity.
I have the "Prayers of Kierkegaard" that I bring to the pews every Sunday. Before mass today, I read in the biographical account of Kierkegaard's life in this book, that Kierkegaard believed his role was to "wound from behind." I can think of no greater descriptor for one who is calling us to Christ.
Not to be pro-Marxist but I think Bishop Barron is responding to a strawman. Communism and socialism may be similar in some ways but are fundamentally different in other ways. It's true that millennials support socialism more than previous generations, but not so much communism. Communism is when the working class owns the means of production while socialism is when the government owns the means of production. Communism is very hard left while socialism is more flexible and can be either pro or anti market. If being a Catholic mean being complacent to the status quo then I don't see a lot of millennials becoming Catholic. I'm not saying Catholic social teachings should get behind Karl Marx but I think more revolutionary thinking in regards to current economic system would help the Catholics teaching evolve in a meaningful way.
Well, I was discussing Marxism, not socialism. But Catholic social teaching is indeed explicitly against socialism and in favor of the market economy.
America already has socialist policies.
@@tornay131 Yeah, that's true, which is why socialism shouldn't be seen as such a bad thing.
@@neosoontoretro keep what works, get rid of what doesn't, try other things.
But this is the wrong country for open mindedness .
Just going to paste in a reply I made to another poster here.
What the heck is wrong with you? Can you not see that markets provide innovation and the most efficient use of resources? The more of your economy you hand over to the government the less of any future you will have. There is no true investment or capital repair or accumulation. The only reason these so called socialist or social democracies work even function is because they live off the seed corn of their prior development and existing free market economies. And one day that will be gone and you'll be stuck in the future that never changes.
You people have no concept of what it actually takes for economies to survive let alone grow. To be more plain - what of any significance have any of these social democracies contributed to the world economy in the way of innovation and easing the burden of work? Maybe you dont see it because of all the other innovative economies that still exist in the world and provide you with the latest developments to make life better. But you had better wake up soon because if we all go the route of social democracy, there will be no innovation because of no capital investment and therefore your worst nightmare of resources running out will come true. And for all the complaining about wealth inequity, it will never change once you have your blessed social democracy. The rich will stay rich and continue to run your lives much more so than now.
I appreciate the desire to explore other political arrangements. I'd just rather not experiment with the one that has failed for 100 years to produce anything besides genocide.
40 million people right now in the USA without adequate access to food. Is capitalism succeeding?
@@DoctorDewgong so you'd rather just murder them deliberately? Don't pretend like you are more moral because you advocate literal mass murder.
@@CoryTheRaven socialism is when enterprise is owned by the workers who operate it. Instead of excess profits going to owners or shareholders, it goes to the workers who create it. Where does mass murder come into play?
@@DoctorDewgong where does mass murder come in to play? Every time.
@@CoryTheRaven and every person who has been killed by American military forces is a death attributed to capitalism?
Marxists speak of greed, but envy is a bigger problem today. So many people seem to think someone else owes them a living.
Two sides of the same coin.
@@LostArchivist: Maybe, but only greed is ever talked about.
You think envy is a bigger problem than greed? What in the name of God do you mean? The single moms working 60 hours per week and still remaining poor are a problem to you and they're just "envious" of the billionaires living in decadence on profits built on the backs of workers?? Yours is a sickening worldview, my friend
An excellent summary of Marx in historical context. After studying Marx with a committed Marxist lecturer I concluded that Marx's analysis of the nature of capitalist economics was excellent but his prophecy regarding the dialectic outcome as a Utopian communism, like most prophecies, proved entirely inadequate. In a world that is consciously and deliberately secular-materialist, Marxism stands as an excellent secular-humanist potential means to resolution of economic and social injustice. For those with a Christian transcendental perspective it is easy to see why it will always be doomed to fail and why attempts to realise the ideal are doomed to increase bloodshed.
Marxism is anti-humanist
@@llamamall3653 I would disagree with that but it may depend on what you mean by humanist.
And for Marxists, it's easy to see why Chistian Heaven (Utopia) is also nonesense.
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 Of course Heaven must be nonsense when you subscribe to a purely materialist worldview. Heaven is only possible when the worldview includes a materially transcend dimension. Thus the question becomes, is there a material transcendent dimension available to human experience - or not? Is there any evidence of such a dimension - or not?
@@petergrey4151 The Catholic Church itself is Materialist. All the pomp and ceremony is all show. The Popes robes, gold crosses and incense, worldly stuff.
Bizarre for a Church so preoccupied with the next life....
If you're smart, suspicious of the Religious Right and Neo-liberalism, and care about the working class poor, read Marx.
How about volunteering your time to help those less-fortunate than you are.
"If you're smart" is so condescending, as the implication is that only the "smart" people will read Marx and end up thinking like you do.
I'd be much happier if people read the Catholic Social Teaching tradition.
Thanks brandon and bp barron informative video
If you want to fix economic inequality, all roads lead to Henry George. Read progress and poverty.
Ryan G I’m not sure what you’re insinuating. Henry George was disliked by both Marx and Neoliberals.
Georgism, in my opinion, is the economic middle way.
It seems to me that Rerum Novarum is trying to combat the worst tendencies of both capitalism and Marxism. I do not consider myself a Marxist, but I do think Marx's critique of capitalism makes valid and salient points. Also, in parts of the world where colonialism and capitalism have crushed the population like in Ireland and Latin America these are also the places where historically priests and the church have had a more "radical" strain to them and have been killed for advocating for the preferential option for the poor. The church should be careful not to cozy up to capitalism too much in it's critique of Marx. Both systems can lead to problems.
I agree that capitalism has its problems, but I don't subscribe to a proposal of moral equivalency. Marxism is far, far, far worse than capitalism, both in terms of what it produces economically and in its staggering body count.
But you could say that Capitalism has a pretty high body count too! In its most rabid emergent forms, ie. 18th and 19th c. Great Britain whereby millions of slaves were worked to death, raped, murdered etc in colonies like the West Indies; in Ireland millions died in the great famine because the granaries of England took Irish food exports. Then we have the East India Company which oppressed and starved to death many millions of colonised Indians. The Batista Regime, a puppet state of Capitalist America was notably more brutal and oppressive to the Cuban people than the socialist Castro regime which followed.
And to further add so called Capitalist USA killed an estimated 3 to 4 million Indo Chinese during the Vietnam War; then invaded Iraq on false pretext and killed a further half a mill to a million, indirectly or directly as a result. This is on top of the half a million Iraqi children who died as a direct result of the economic blockade on Husseins Iraq in the 12 years preceding. Yes, Stalin was a monster who killed millions, but are we supposed to say there is no moral equivalence if the USA killed millions too, just not so intensively, and not so much its domestic population? What about the genocide of native Americans? I am part Cherokee....have you heard of the trail of tears Father?
If you think that Marx created socialism, you don't know your history or your Bible.
"Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy."
- Ezekiel 16 verse 49
"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."
- Acts 4 verse 32
Marx didn't create socialism; he simply created an important critique of capitalism and its tendency to destroy family life and make ordinary people poorer (both of which are happening in America today.)
Holy Bible is ONE GOD'S Own Book ... HIS Word is rebelled to by d'evil opposing spirit in worldly ideas (as marxism)
So is Baron saying people in hell can be saved or redeemed?
It is also traditionally held by the Church that Christ went to Sheol to bring the faithful of the Old Testament into Heaven, as the gates were not opened for sinners until His sacrifice. There is a name for the level, though I am not certain as to what it was. If anything that I said was inaccurate, someone please do correct me.
Hades not Gehenna.
@@christophersnedeker2065 Sheol would be a better term yes? Hades is a Greek approximate term. Thank you for catching this old mistake. God bless you, through Our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ! Amen.
@@christophersnedeker2065 I just realized my reply may have come across as snarky. That was not my intention I am sorry if it offended you. I was wondering if you thought Sheol would work better or not?
@@LostArchivist it would.
@@christophersnedeker2065 Thank you.
Thank you guys for this high quality discussions i really appreciate it when you clear out issues like these. Pls pray for me
Reading Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker Movement has been really influential to me in giving me a real Christian Radicalism. Vehemently orthodox Catholic, lover of the poor, devoted to the Mass and Prophet of the 20th Century.
Much love and respect to Bishop Barron on your thoughtful and nuanced approach to complex topics like this. I'm a former Marxist and re-convert to Catholicism. Politically and economically I am still very much left of center, and would probably consider myself a democratic socialist (the belief that a more just socialist society can be created through peaceful and democratic reforms, rather than violent overthrow). I will agree that many atrocities have been committed in the name of Marxism throughout the 20th century; however, there are a few points in defense of some Marxian ideas that came to my mind while listening:
1) As Catholics, our biggest critique of Marx is often his explicit atheism and view of religion as the "opiate of the masses". I believe along with many other Christians that the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels (especially Luke) are empowering to the poor and oppressed. However, I'd agree that at times religion can and has been used as somewhat of an "opiate" to oppress the poor. Some Christians cherry-picked Bible versus to justify American slavery. You can even look at much of the Christian Right and prosperity gospel folks of today and see how Christianity gets twisted into an idolatry of wealth and hyper-nationalism. Many leftists see these as reasons to throw out religion, whereas I see these as reasons to stand up and affirm more strongly our Christian values of justice and service to the poor.
2) The church teaches that private property is a good thing for the political well being of people. I would agree, and I think Soviet and Chinese policies of forced collectivization were disastrous in that regard. However, what about low-income renters who will never be able to afford to own property, or how about the masses of homeless people in the United States? While capitalism allows for property rights, it does nothing to ensure that property is distributed in just way. Why can't we look toward socialist ideas of agrarian land reform (not collectivization) and housing as a guaranteed human right?
3) You made a good point about the contrast between early capitalism of Marx's time versus the reformed capitalism of today. It is great that we now have child labor laws, minimum wage, unemployment insurance, unionization, etc. However, these reforms were fought and died for via intense working-class struggle: labor agitation, strikes, boycotts, violent state repression, etc. Many of the people leading the call for reform were themselves socialists. Since roughly the 1980's we've seen workers rights slowly erode and real wages remain stagnant and even in decline for many low-income people due to the increased corporate influence in politics. Many European countries have stronger protections for workers like universal healthcare and paid sick leave largely because they have stronger socialist political parties and stronger unions. My point is: class struggle is real even in countries that have not seen violent overthrow of the government. This struggle has led to better outcomes for working people. We can have moments of class conflict and moments of class cooperation. Perhaps the real "Marxist synthesis" that history has shown us is actually a mixed-economy with both capitalist and socialist features. I see nothing wrong, especially in the U.S., with pushing our society in a more socialist direction.
4) Going off my last point, there is a reason that Millennial and GenZ specifically have embraced socialist ideas more than the Boomers and GenXers before us. We've come of age during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and now we could be entering a new depression. We weren't around for the glory days of American capitalism in the 1950's-60's, and it doesn't seem to be coming back any time soon. We've seen massive wealth inequality, generations of deindustrialization, mass incarceration, skyrocketing healthcare and education costs, endless wars, drug epidemics, and now a billionaire president who panders to racism, bigotry, and division. There is a general feeling that things can't go on like this, and large scale systemic change is necessary. We must reshape our priorities in a way that is more just, and I don't think that belief contradicts the Catholic Church's teaching.
You might like distributionism. Seek out GK Chesterton's essays and works on it. Chesterton, the greatest Catholic thinker of the 20th century, was very much against the rampant capitalism and exploitation we see in our society today.
A lot of things like communism and socialism I dont actually understand.
Socialism is merely social ownership of capital. It can be the government, which is meant to be a democracy and usually entails workers councils. It could also be a cooperative (worker owned and controlled businesses) based economy, as per Pierre Joseph Proudhon. It's a generalized term that encompasses many ideologies.
Communism has two definitions, on the one hand it is any ideology that communism is the goal.
Communism as per Marx is the last stage of economic development, following socialism. In this instance communism is a stateless classless society without a monetary system.
Economics changes our lives for better or worse just as surely as medicine or law. Thanks you for this!
I wonder what Jesus would think about Capitalism, Socialism, Marxism, Communism, Racism etc. I guess if you/we read the bible you/we will get the answer. We live in sad times.
Jesus wanted the nations to be kept separate, he would be anti multi-culturalism.
Our problem is the endless numbers of pseudo-intellectuals blathering about Adam Smith and Karl Marx but our politicians cannot make double-entry accounting/finance mandatory in the schools.
Funny, the pseudo-intellectuals don't suggest that either. The United States could have done that since Sputnik.
Very interesting. But what do you think about non-marxisti visions of communism in tradition of early Christians ideology (Thomas More, J. V. Andreae) and utopian socialists inspired by Christianism, especially Saint-Simon, Étienne Cabet and Wilhlem Weitling? There are no atheistic (Feurbach) parts in this teachings...
So, to summarize: "Marx was an atheist and therefore to think he was right you have to be an atheist so therefore he was wrong. Also, fomenting class struggle is bad, instead we should encourage the classes to work together for the greater good. What is that greater good if not working towards a more fair and just society? Idk, Jesus, probably."
RUclips has unsubscribed me from this channel numerous times.
The pandemic that is occurring now is brought on by rooted evil in our society and in hearts and minds of all people. The concepts that are discussed in this video are great, but what is missing is the explanation of how people with lack of life experience fall easily prey to the "attractive" nature of Communism/Socialism. Lacking the understanding of how such a system is impossible, is what makes young people see things as "easy and convenient."
Our greatest problem right now is the "self entitlement" nature that has been put into the younger generation's mindset. With the ever pressing media structure that constantly gives half truths, we see people "following along" rather than "walking along" as our forefathers once did in our great nation! Were there social injustices? Of course, but those were committed by people that walked away from the TRUE teachings of Christ and Catholicism.
What we need now is the spread of the RIGHT message from God. The greatest question posed by humanity is, "What is the meaning of life?" The answer to this question, in turn answers a lot more questions posed by supposed "Atheists" in today's world. I put the "Atheists" in quotes because I once could have been considered one. Through my dedicated study of religion and search for truth, I have come to realize, there are fewer Atheists than what they would really say. By definition, an Atheist is, "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." A true Atheist will not argue with a religious person. They would say, "I don't believe and will never believe. They would not engage in any discussion whatsoever about Religion or God.
Now that we have that out of the way, what other questions go hand-in-hand with "What is the meaning of life?" How about the one, "Why did God create this whole Universe?" Another great one, "Why does God allow evil to exist?" You see where I am going with this...
So let's answer the real big question and then I will leave it up to your imagination to answer the other questions. What is the meaning of life? So many people have said so many things and my 6th grade Catechism class that I teach, I get some great ones! Check out the list below for a few good examples:
1. To have babies.
2. To help others.
3. Progress humanity.
4. Bring peace to the world.
5. To experience life to its fullest.
The list can go on and on! The problem with the list is that it lacks the account of one major point of view! The reason why it lacks the point of view is because we are not asking the question right... The question should be, "God, why did you create the Universe and this life?" Now true perspective is in place of the question and we can now think about the question from "God's" point of view instead of our own. I know, all us good Catholics are going to say, "We can't answer for God because we have been told that it is too complex for human understanding all of our lives." That is where God starting talking back to me in my own prayers. He told me to simplify it all! I thought all about everything that has been said to me in life and in the teachings, but none of it helped. So God gave me the gentle nudge with the question, "What have I been working on?" The answer was not easy to that question, but ultimately I came to understand that God has been working on Heaven. He then asked me, "What is Heaven?" Man, I thought up every single parable Jesus ever said to describe the Kingdom of God. Ultimately God told me to simplify it all and describe what I think Heaven would be like. Man, I did the usual saying "clouds, golden gate, family to greet me, peace, happiness, and listed everything I could." God said to me, "Describe everything you just said in a SINGLE word." Wow, that was tough! I used many words, but only one of them gave me chills up and down my spine. Only one word satisfied his command. Heaven is PERFECTION. So that prompted me to think more as God made me to think about why he created the Universe. A major question came to mind... "If Heaven is supposed to be perfect, can human arrogance exist in Heaven?" That was it, the final piece of the puzzle that would change the face of humanity! The answer to the real question! "NO, human arrogance cannot exist in a perfect heaven!" I know I would not be at peace or happy with my family if someone got up there complaining about the cloud that I got over his/her own! None of the 7 deadly sins could exist in the Perfect Heaven. God created the Universe so we could suffer pain, war, loss, and in general EVIL to learn 2 important lessons in our lifetime! The 2 lessons go hand-in-hand!
1. LOVE
2. HUMILITY
Only when our souls learn these 2 lessons, will we be able to accept Heaven for what it truly is! As Jesus said, we need to humble ourselves.
I hope this has helped you all! I plan to do a VLOG one day as I become a Deacon and hopefully, I will be able to enlighten more! Spread the word about this lesson and we will beat back evil!
@@sr.luisraytraceiii2422 I appreciate your reply. I work in the field of Information Technology and work for a great corporation. I have my college degree and it took me a long time to get to the position I am in right now at 41 years of age. A few of my co-workers do not have a college degree and are making more money than I am making in effectively the same role. I am not complaining, as I am blessed to work from my home. We all share a great amount of experience and my boss is trying to level me up with pay too.
Your example above is actually the very point of what I said. Every person will be given a chance if they humble themselves. I have gotten many people hired on my very team because I saw humility in their hearts. They were humble and excited for the opportunity to learn.
Based on what you said, it sounds like you are that same very person you describe. I understand your frustration and how tough your life must be. I too was in your shoes. My arrogance blinded me from the truth of my words above. No one wanted to give me a chance to prove myself in the IT world. I worked hard for where I am now and humbled myself in my words and actions. That is when the doors started opening for me. Jesus said it best as the Golden Rule of life. "Treat others the way you wish to be treated." In other words, respect all people and they will respect you. Only when you let go of your anger at your situation, will you be more open to allow people to love you back and help you grow. If you find yourself yelling, cursing, or saying negative things, then catch yourself. Force those habits out of your mind. Be a positive light and things beyond your imagination will start to happen. It only takes the decision to let go of anger and hate to turn us into a better person. Simply start by hugging your wife and 5 kids and more importantly, let them hug you back. Love from the depth of your heart for the person God placed in your life as we are meant to always love that person. I look forward to growing old with my wife of 20 years. I could never imagine myself with another woman should be predecease me. Hence I am moving forward to being a Deacon in the Catholic Church. I look back on my youth these days and realize how much I have grown and learned. God can see the amount of Humility we have in our hearts. If we were to put it into a percentage or think about it as filling a bottle of water, that can represent how much we have humbled ourselves. In our lives, our humility bottle starts out empty. As we go through suffering, it slowly begins to fill. When we experience real love in our hearts, it fills the bottle. When we have our children, the bottle fills more! I like to think my bottle at 41 is at 10% fill right now. :P However, I know the only one that knows that true number is God. I leave it all to him!
I hope this reply helps you and God bless you and your family with love, laughter, wonderful memories, and happiness always!
One reason I believe capitalism and free markets succeed is that they represent the fundamental structure of nature. In nature those with the best skills in the given situation win out. Likewise, this skill is not equally distributed among individuals, thus a system where all skills are valued the same cannot be sustained.
what do you mean by "the same"
My question is, "what happens to those that, despite their best efforts, don't 'win out?'" In ages where a more raw capitalism existed, many just died. This is why the Church brings in the fact that moral constraints are needed in the market economy.
Yes he got a lot of his information from Hagel but that's not where he got the theory of Communism which is Marxism socialism is communism as well they're just two sides of the same coin but again that's a very deep conversation and I highly doubt anyone who agrees with this video will understand
Catholic Church sided with Mussolini. What about that?
ruclips.net/video/tmYNyM78I0s/видео.html
Millennials would be easily converted to traditional Catholicism. It’s what we crave. Sadly rome made it illegal to practice the faith of our forefathers.
Holaaa será que hay subtítulos en español. Muchas gracias
Great analysis!
He really doesn't know Marx, and how Lenin, Mao , Stalin, etc didn't particularly practice Marxism. Lenin was very much to the right.
Any comment on the recent article sympathetic to Marxism published in the Jesuit magazine America? The author appears to write regularly for the Jesuit magazine and is an avowed Marxist. He says so in the article.
As a Catholic and a socialist, Im glad you are addressing Marxism. Its clear that you have a really in depth understanding of his ideology. I just frankly cant see the morality of the capitalist system.
Well, it is arguably hard to find any sensibility in a system that keeps massive amounts of people in poverty in order to enrich a small group of people. And then to somehow correlate that to the long-standing practice of caring for the poor is an even further stretch, there is a reason that people like Dorothy Day exist and her existence was for the better.
Capitalism is not a philosophy. So it doesn't have a morality. Capitalism is private ownership of means of production and land with voluntary transactions. Marxism is a philosophy espousing socialist market and group based hate. You are either and idiot or don't know what socialism and capitalism are.
@@gorequillnachovidal not quite the tone that will bear any fruit, my friend.
Socialism is condemned by the Church. Where is the morality of socialism??? It is theft at the point of a AK-47 taking from the productive and giving to the non-productive. A market economy is morally neutral and is actually the economic system as envisioned by the Jesuits at Salamanca who began treating Economics as a science and applying Thomistic principles to it.
@@gorequillnachovidal Capitalism is still informed by ideology, and has moral values attached to it. See Neil Dewitt's comment making moral judgments.
The funny thing is his comment, can also make the case in support of socialism, how can capitalism be justified if the enclosure of the commons was made a the blade of sword. Is taking back that which was stolen really theft? If so, how could merchants and feudal lords overthrow the monarchy, wouldn't that also be theft, and would you be able to justify liberalism on this basis?
Anyone who reads Marx should then study the history of its implementation.
The problem with the far Left's quest for justice is they conduct it without temperance or wisdom fueled a Marcusean asymmetrical tolerance.
I will admit that one of the reasons why I am curious about Catholicism is its anti-Marxist stance. We have seen time and time again when Marxist ideology is implemented the result isn't Justice but revenge followed by dictatorial oppression. I have a vested interest promoting the cultural hegemony that has, thus far, prevented the rise of Communism in advanced Western industrial nations as my family and I would likely fall victim to the wave of revenge. Serendipitously, I was drawn to St. Joseph as a father not knowing that he is also the Patron Saint of Workers. I think it would be beautiful to see counter-Mayday protests of people praying the rosary under the protection of St. Joseph.
Anyways, thank you for the video.
lol yeah stay scared we are going to eat you yum yum
@@ArtBear88 the hundred million corpses and general inhumanity of socialism is warning enough. Enjoy being surprised when they line you up against a wall.
pls spanish subtitles :) anyways amazing content! thanksssssssssssss
You need to talk to Professor Richard Wolff for better understanding of Marx. I'll agree with Marx in regards to religion , hard to reconcile, same problem Capitalism has with religion and democracy. Religion (which one to begin with) needs to be non existent, or at the very least have nothing to do with the economy.
Regardless the flaws of Marx, he was spot-on regarding capital and the exploitation of labor. Socialism isn't the answer, but he was first to see the inherent flaws of capitalism.
They're not "inherent flaws of Capitalism". They're inherent flaws of unredeemed HUMANITY. The Capitalism part is extraneous to the exploitation problem. Except in as much as a free-market economy actually allows people the remedy of free choice, i.e., the ability to choose less-exploitative or non-exploitative options. In any other system, the inevitable exploitation is only more entrenched and "inherent". We don't need to get rid of Capitalism. We need to get rid of Sociopaths. Marx was certainly not the first to see the flaws. He was merely the first to popularize that particular lie about where the "flaws" really originate. The flaw of Marx and the flaw of Capitalism, are in fact one and the same: delusional depravity in the human heart. Futile reliance on external man-made power structures, for false relief from an internal state of spiritual slavery.
Tom thx, wrong. I never said his solution was the cure.
boatrat74, um...by capitalism is meant the predatory strain that we in the US idolize. Remember, there is a sliding scale to any -ism. Capitalistic elements, as espoused in the Distributist movement, are quite beneficial. Just as there are socialist elements that are quite beneficial.
@@sr.luisraytraceiii2422
Don't come at me with that kind of brain-dead banality. The fact that we CAN'T get rid of Sociopaths, is exactly my obvious implication!
Boy, you people just refuse to see the point. You need to imagine living somewhere where it isn't just a Walmart IN the country, but where Walmart IS the country. ONLY Walmart, with NOWHERE else to shop. So they're still exploitative, but now it's completely pervasive, because now it's completely unchecked. And now they aren't even "cheap"! Sociopaths running Walmart-stan, you don't get to vote about replacing them, you've got nowhere else to work apart from being exploited along with everyone else in Walmart-stan, you're not allowed to talk about your exploitation, and you're not even allowed to leave. And if you try doing anything to change the political situation, you're sent to prison, or a "reeducation" camp, or a death-work camp, or just disappeared/killed outright.
Here, at least YOU... can CHOOSE, NOT to support Walmart. Anywhere without Capitalism, you don't have any choice at all. That's ALL "Capitalism" is: Free Choice. What we Westerners call Capitalism (what the Catholics are more generically calling a "Market Economy") is not a pre-planned system anyone invented by political fiat. It's merely the inevitable organic outgrowth manifestation of natural human competition (mostly good or at least benign, but including some inevitable evils from the aforementioned ineradicable Sociopaths). Any attempt to abolish open competition from the marketplace, only results in overt slavery for everyone. The dissolution of the "Marketplace" itself. History has proven this catastrophically. Everywhere, every time. Only the willfully blind pretend otherwise.
You still wanna talk about "exploitation"? Whatever evils their management may be guilty of, I can at least say that no one, anywhere, was ever FORCED to work at Walmart. No more than you've ever been forced to shop there.
Distributism ❤
*incoming “FRICK BOOMERS” comments*
As a mellienal yes, frick boomers. But frick millienals for following the flawed and mad views of Marx. People suck generationally, just in different ways. God bless :)
Great video!
很有意思的主題, 可是不太懂, 需要好好研究一下.
Thanks Your Excellency. I just wonder how many lives would be saved if das capital was never written. By the way. Have you ever a movie review on "No country for old men"?
Ryan G yep
How many people died before Das capital was written? This is a silly conjecture. The French revolution happened before Marx. The poor being tired of the fat greey and rich shitting on them would have happened regardless of Marx. Anyone who supports capitalism is not Christian. The greed and avarice that capitalism supports is anti Christian.
Bishop Baron seems very well read, but I noticed some problems in what he said. First and most importantly, he didn't actually give a fleshed out argument as to why collective ownership is bad using any moral axiom or scripture, he instead uses an appeal to authority through the statement of a previous pope (15:47). He briefly says something about how free exchange is important for our moral freedom but he ignores the aspects of Marxist analysis that show the ways in which markets restrict an individual's freedom.
Secondly, he appears to ignore the idea that a person can advocate for Socialism through nonviolent means, and seems to imply that any violence in favor of reforming our social structures is not moral. While violence is bad, I would argue that it is sometimes necessary to uphold morality, and the principle of the Double Effect lines up with my evaluation. As for the assumption that Socialism can only be achieved through violence, is it impossible to fathom Socialist policies could be voted for peacefully in a well run democracy?
Lastly, Baron asserts that you cannot be a Marxist and believe in God (15:19). This might be a bit of a nitpick, but if both people championing Socialist policies say they are Marxists and right-wing politicians conflate Socialism, Communism, and Marxism in policy terms, then clearly the discourse has determined that the economic parts of Marx's philosophy are the parts that make someone a Marxist. If nothing else, the English language already has a word for the religious aspect of Marxist philosophy in isolation (atheism), so for the sake of clarity there should be a word to discuss the economic side of Marxist philosophy in isolation (Communism or Socialism).
I understand there is a time limit with this segment, but I would've preferred it if Bishop Baron defended his position stronger and more thoroughly.
I’m listening to a podcast called Constitutionally Speaking. One of the things I really like about it is that they give a lot of information about the founding fathers. The last episodes I listened to talked about Madison. He was a humanist and he saw men as they are not what you think they can be. He new that men can be very selfish and put themselves before the state or country. Madison new that you had to have checks and balances. I haven’t read Marx But there doesn’t seem to be any checks and balances in that system.
Greg Eades I agree that the checks and balances are slowly being destroyed. Socialism and communism would finish them off. I was just pointing out the difference in way that Madison looked at things compared to Marx. Marx seemed to think that if he could just get people to listen to him they could make a Utopia. Again I haven’t read Marx but you see this kind of naive belief in many college students. They see man as they think he can be not what they are, very imperfect. To me the Gospel is a form of checks and balances.
Greg Eades I fully support the separation of church and state just like I fully support the separation of ideology and state. To me there is no difference in a church controlling a government than an ideology controlling a government. Especially an ideology that has failed over and over again. There is no perfect way to govern but I would rather have a government based on the Constitution where you can vote someone in and out of office instead of having to do it by a revolution. I fully understand that our system has been corrupted but I disagree with you that all checks and balances are gone. The left are the ones trying to destroy the ones we have left. All checks and balances were or are gone in the Soviet Union, East Germany, Cuba, North Korea, China etc. Who gets to say what’s fair and what’s equal? Something that is fair and equal might not be fair and equal to someone else. I’m not trying to convince you, I’m just giving my opinion. I respect that you have yours.
Greg Eades when I talk about the Gospel being a checks an balance, I mean personally for me.
Greg Eades The left are trying to destroy free speech, stack the Supreme Court and get rid of the electoral college. Free Speech includes the right to support and vote for who you choose to for any office. People are being harassed because they chose to vote for Trump. I don’t care who anyone votes for, I care that you have that right to choose. Government isn’t good at running anything but the left wants them to take over healthcare provide “free this and free that”. The government does not have the right to redistribute wealth. Professors are being fired or attacked on the internet for disagreeing with the left. They are destroying free speech by labeling speech as hate speech. They label anyone who disagrees with them as a racist or some other label to try to shut them up. The Soviet Union was not a monarchy under Lenin and Stalin and hasn’t been a monarchy since then.
Greg Eades everyone likes to hold Sweden up as the example but they don’t talk about the fact that Sweden is more capitalist than we are. The low income and middle income have agreed to pay high taxes in trade for social programs. This isn’t welfare, they look down on anyone living off the government. The high income and businesses pay a lower percentage of taxes than we do in the US. They protect the capitalist system because they know a good economy helps everyone. They also know that if you over tax businesses they leave. They have privatized education and a lot of the medical care. Competition keeps the cost lower. You are free to choose which school, doctor or hospital you want to go to so they have to compete for your business. This also helps to keep the quality up. In the US only 50% of the population pay federal income taxes. The people who use most of the services don’t pay any federal income taxes. How are you going to pay for all the Free stuff the left wants to offer? Are the low and middle income people willing to pay high taxes to have those social programs? If they are fine implement them. Are they going to allow school choice or are they going to keep letting the teachers unions stop that. Are they going to allow competition in medical care and medical insurance or are they going to let the government take them over so we can all have insuance like the VA. You also can’t have the kind of social programs they have in Sweden or the welfare programs we have in the US and have mass immigration, It overwhelms the system.
Maybe they are attracted to socialism because the current firm of American capitalism is not delivering fur the vast majority of the people.