Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Stone holm

"well, You Say You Want A Revolution..."

Recommended Posts

Pope doubles down on denouncing capitalism, said to have called the youth to revolution in South America.  Can't wait to see him set the Catholics on fire in the United States.

Share this post


Link to post

If he could have stayed with his emulation of St. Francis he would have done the world more good.  However, his continued forays into criticisms of political systems runs the risk of him becoming a tinkling cymbal.  There was a time when we created boogie men out of Socialists and Communists; now it is the big, bad Capitalists.  Any political system will work and they each have weaknesses.  If socialism works for you, great. Do that.  However, there is a big difference between helping the poor and dressing Capitalism in a wolf's clothing and screaming about how scary it is. 

Share this post


Link to post

Pope doubles down on denouncing capitalism, said to have called the youth to revolution in South America.  Can't wait to see him set the Catholics on fire in the United States.

Wait, there is capitalism in South America? Who knew. Maybe he was talking about that bastion of capitalism in Venezuela?

Share this post


Link to post

He ain't going to make anywhere anyhow. You know it's going to be alright.

Share this post


Link to post

Pope doubles down on denouncing capitalism

 

In 1875 the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Council of the Twelve Apostles (Brigham Young was President at the time) issued an official statement related to the Church’s economic cooperative system. In that statement, they issued a stern warning about the consequences of gross wealth disparity:

 

 

The people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice… One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously… are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations… If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

In 1875 the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Council of the Twelve Apostles (Brigham Young was President at the time) issued an official statement related to the Church’s economic cooperative system. In that statement, they issued a stern warning about the consequences of gross wealth disparity:

 

And yet leaders of the Church have always offered equally strong criticisms of socialist economies and policies.

Share this post


Link to post

In 1875 the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Council of the Twelve Apostles (Brigham Young was President at the time) issued an official statement related to the Church’s economic cooperative system. In that statement, they issued a stern warning about the consequences of gross wealth disparity:

 

Since it's an official First Presidency declaration, it's either the mind and will of the Lord or personal opinion, depending on one's political persuasion and/or the guidance of the spirit.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, Skeptic:

 

Care to clue us in on what your ellipses are convenienly omitting?

 

(Whaaat?  Me, skeptical? :unsure:  Noooooo! :unknw:;))

Share this post


Link to post

And yet leaders of the Church have always offered equally strong criticisms of socialist economies and policies.

 

Did the First Presidency issue a statement? What is more important?

a) First Presidency statement

b) individual opinions 

 

How come the most socially progressive countries in the world have a very low poverty rate? Look at the CIA data 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

and here is a list 

 

screen%20shot%202014-04-03%20at%2010.24.

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

Did the First Presidency issue a statement? What is more important?

a) First Presidency statement

b) individual opinions 

 

How come the most socially progressive countries in the world have a very low poverty rate? Look at the CIA data 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

and here is a list 

 

 

I will just leave this here for you; don't bother responding to me until you have read every last word:

 

 

 

(L-6) The Lord’s Way Versus the World’s Way

Some have suggested that the practice of the law of consecration and the system of the united order are only a religious kind of socialism or communism. Others assert that it was a development either from the economic philosophies of Joseph Smith’s day or from communal experiments within the new religion. Such assumptions are false. The Prophet Joseph Smith attended a presentation on socialism in September 1843 at Nauvoo. His response was to declare that he“did not believe the doctrine” (History of the Church, 6:33). In more recent times Elder Marion G. Romney outlined the differences between the revealed system of the united order and the socialistic programs:

“(1) The cornerstone of the United Order is belief in God and acceptance of him as Lord of the earth and the author of the United Order.

“Socialism, wholly materialistic, is founded in the wisdom of men and not of God. Although all socialists may not be atheists, none of them in theory or practice seek the Lord to establish his righteousness.

“(2) The United Order is implemented by the voluntary free-will actions of men, evidenced by a consecration of all their property to the Church of God.

“… Socialism is implemented by external force, the power of the state.

“(3) … The United Order is operated upon the principle of private ownership and individual management.

“Thus in both implementation and ownership and management of property, the United Order preserves to men their God-given agency, while socialism deprives them of it.

“(4) The United Order is non-political.

“Socialism is political, both in theory and practice. It is thus exposed to, and riddled by, the corruption that plagues and finally destroys all political governments that undertake to abridge man’s agency.

“(5) A righteous people is a prerequisite to the United Order.

“Socialism argues that it as a system will eliminate the evils of the profit motive.

“The United Order exalts the poor and humbles the rich. In the process both are sanctified. The poor, released from the bondage and humiliating limitations of poverty, are enabled as free men to rise to their full potential, both temporally and spiritually. The rich, by consecration and by imparting of their surplus for the benefit of the poor, not by constraint but willingly as an act of free will, evidence that charity for their fellowmen characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ [Moroni 7:47.]” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1966, p. 97.)

President J. Reuben Clark Jr. said: “The United Order has not been generally understood. … [it] was not a communal system. … The United Order and communism are not synonymous. Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the United Order. There is no mistake about this and those who go about telling us otherwise either do not know or have failed to understand or are wilfully misrepresenting.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1943, p. 11.)

President Marion G. Romney warned about the continuing imitations of the adversary: “In this modern world plagued with counterfeits for the Lord’s plan, we must not be misled into supposing that we can discharge our obligations to the poor and the needy by shifting the responsibility to some governmental or other public agency. Only by voluntarily giving out of an abundant love for our neighbors can we develop that charity characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ [Moroni 7:47.]” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1972, p. 115; or Ensign, Jan. 1973, p. 98.)

President Romney noted:

“I suggest we consider what has happened to our agency with respect to … government welfare services. …

“The difference between having the means with which to administer welfare assistance taken from us and voluntarily contributing it out of our love of God and fellowman is the difference between freedom and slavery. …

“When we love the Lord our God with all our hearts, might, mind, and strength, we will love our brothers as ourselves, and we will voluntarily, in the exercise of our free agency, impart of our substance for their support. …

“President [J. Reuben] Clark, … referring to government gratuities, said:

“‘The dispensing of these great quantities of gratuities has produced in the minds of hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of people … a love for idleness, a feeling that the world owes them a living. It has made a breeding ground for some of the most destructive political doctrines that have ever found any hold, … and I think it may lead us into serious political trouble. …

“‘… Society owes to no man a life of idleness, no matter what his age. I have never seen one line in Holy Writ that calls for, or even sanctions this. In the past no free society has been able to support great groups in idleness and live free.’ (CR, Apr. 1938, pp. 106–7.) …

“… Both history and prophecy—and I may add, common sense—bear witness to the fact that no civilization can long endure which follows the course charted by bemused manipulators and now being implemented as government welfare programs all around the world.

“Babylon shall be destroyed, and great shall be the fall thereof. (See D&C 1:16.)

“But do not be discouraged. Zion will not go down with her, because Zion shall be built on the principles of love of God and fellowman, work, and earnest labor, as God has directed.” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1976, pp. 164–66, 169; or Ensign, May 1976, pp. 120–21, 123.)

 

I also note that nothing from your 1st Presidency statement is an endorsement for socialism or any other political system.

Share this post


Link to post

Since it's an official First Presidency declaration, it's either the mind and will of the Lord or personal opinion, depending on one's political persuasion and/or the guidance of the spirit.

 

Tell that to TSC. I personally do not see any discrepancy between his provided quote or any of mine.

Share this post


Link to post

I also note that nothing from your 1st Presidency statement is an endorsement for socialism or any other political system.

 

and I didn't say anything about socialism in my first comment, you brought it up in your response. 

Aren't you suppose to be a lawyer? 

 

I will just leave this here for you; don't bother responding to me until you have read every last word

 

LOL sure.  Is the United Order closer to Capitalism or Progressive Socialism? You think the early church would support Capitalism? 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/united-order

 

What about him? You think he would support Capitalism? "An economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state"

 

richyoungruler.jpg

 

 

By the way, please do not ignore my question. How come the most socially progressive countries in the world have a very low poverty rate? Look at the CIA data 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

See a list 

 

screen%20shot%202014-04-03%20at%2010.24.

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

and I didn't say anything about socialism in my first comment, you brought it up in your response. 

Aren't you suppose to be a lawyer? 

 

So I suppose you don't support socialism then. Good to know.

 

LOL sure.  Is the United Order closer to Capitalism or Progressive Socialism? You think the early church would support Capitalism? 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/united-order

 

You didn't read the quotes I provided, did you. I am skeptical of you.

 

What about him? You think he would support Capitalism? "An economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state"

 

I don't think he cares. I also don't think he thinks the profit motive is a terrible thing (especially if the Parable of the Talents is any indication). Experience would suggest that people are just as capable of being good Christians and Capitalists as anyone else.

 

By the way, please do not ignore my question. How come the most socially progressive countries in the world have a very low poverty rate? Look at the CIA data 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

See a list 

 

More fun stats that do a crap job of making the point you are using them for I see. I don't know why, but these stats at best tell an incomplete story at best and tell us nothing at worst. I imagine there are many complex factors in play that contribute to a country's poverty rate and trying to reduce it to one is idiotic. 

 

Since Wendy's was founded in 1969 more and more Americans have consumer pornography and the family has deteriorated. We need to eliminate Wendy's ASAP.

Edited by Mystery Meat

Share this post


Link to post

So I suppose you don't support socialism then. Good to know.

 

There is a difference between USSR socialism and democratic socialism. USSR is dictatorship. 

Bytheway, I don't necessarily support democratic socialism. 

 

 

You didn't read the quotes I provided, did you. I am skeptical of you.

 

Yes I did, but let me finish. I read 90%, but it is talking about USSR socialism.

 

 

 

I don't think he cares. I also don't think he thinks the profit motive is a terrible thing (especially if the Parable of the Talents is any indication). Experience would suggest that people are just as capable of being good Christians and Capitalists as anyone else.

 

Is the early 19th century church closer to democratic socialism or capitalism? You think the early church would support deregulated capitalism? 

 

 

 

 

More fun stats that do a crap job of making the point you are using them for I see. I don't know why, but these stats at best tell an incomplete story at best and tell us nothing at worst. I imagine there are many complex factors in play that contribute to a country's poverty rate and trying to reduce it to one is idiotic. 

 

Since Wendy's was founded in 1969 more and more Americans have consumer pornography and the family has deteriorated. We need to eliminate Wendy's ASAP.

 

CIA stats  

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

I agree there may be other factors, but I just proved that socially progressive countries don't harm the poor. 

So, what are the other factors anyway? Or is it just because they disagree with you? and shouldn't conservative countries like Israel be doing a lot better? 

 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

There is a difference between USSR socialism and democratic socialism. USSR is dictatorship. 

Bytheway, I don't necessarily support democratic socialism. 

 

Noted.

 

Yes I did, but let me finish. I read 90%, but it is talking about USSR socialism.

 

Doubtful. Joseph Smith was not a fan.

 

Is the early 19th century church closer to democratic socialism or capitalism? You think the early church would support deregulated capitalism? 

 

Neither. It was not related to either of them in any meaningful way. I don't know what the early church would support or how much regulation in capitalism. I don't think you do either.

 

CIA stats  

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

 

I agree there may be other factors, but I just proved that socially progressive countries don't harm the poor. 

So, what are the other factors anyway? Or is it just because they disagree with you? and shouldn't conservative countries like Israel be doing a lot better? 

 

 

You didn't prove anything. There could be any number of factors that mitigate harm done to the poor by socially progressive governments. The stats you provided are crap because they don't prove anything. I don't know what other factors, your guess is as good as mine. Again, assuming Israel isn't doing well, there could be any number of reasons for its poor performance.

Share this post


Link to post

Doubtful. Joseph Smith was not a fan.

 

Even if it is accurate (not everything in the HofC volumes is 100% accurate), that doesn't show Joseph Smith was a fan of deregulated capitalism, and what did Joseph Smith not agree with? the entire context is not clear 

 

Still, is United Order closer to Capitalism or Democratic Socialism? You think the early church would support Capitalism?

 

 

I attended a second lecture on Socialism, by Mr. Finch; and after he got through, I made a few remarks, alluding to Sidney Rigdon and Alexander Campbell getting up a community at Kirtland, and of the big fish there eating up all the little fish. I said I did not believe the doctrine.

Mr. Finch replied in a few minutes, and said—"I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. I am the spiritual Prophet—Mr. Smith the temporal."

Elder John Taylor replied to the lecture at some length.

Friday, 15.—I put up a sign,

 

 

You didn't prove anything. There could be any number of factors that mitigate harm done to the poor by socially progressive governments. The stats you provided are crap because they don't prove anything. I don't know what other factors, your guess is as good as mine. Again, assuming Israel isn't doing well, there could be any number of reasons for its poor performance.

 

Stats will never prove what you disagree with. So you can't name the factors, all you know is that your views are right. 

So you are saying that CIA stats are crap? Please watch the video 

 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

It is clear the First Presidency of 1875 did not support deregulated capitalism "If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent"

 

 

The people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice… One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously… are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations… If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

Share this post


Link to post

The Skeptic Christian,

 

I hate to bother you in the middle of your spitting match with Mystery Meat.  (I would use a different word, one that I believe is more apt, and one that starts with "P" and rhymes with kissing, but, this is a family Board. :D)  That's OK; I know you're busy.  You just keep right on ignoring my request to fill in what those ellipses from your earlier quote might (conveniently!) be omitting. :D

Share this post


Link to post

IF 1 % of the population controls 40% of the wealth , then I believe that the Lord is not pleased. When Bill Gates and others of the Uber wealthy give away huge chunks of their fortunes , I believe that the Lord is pleased. When the State or some oligarchy keeps the wealth to itself and oppresses the vast majority , I believe the Lord is displeased. The problem arises when wealth disparity is such that people begin to lose all hope and , with little else to lose , rise up and destroy all around them. The Book of Mormon provides a warning to us about how a nation can fall apart because of pride and wickedness. Eventually the people devolve into tribalism . We are a long way from that now , but there are pockets within many cities .

Just a note on the Skeptics CIA list \: The top countries have populations which are by and large homogenous and under 10 million. Maybe that has something to do with it.

Edited by strappinglad

Share this post


Link to post

You just keep right on ignoring my request to fill in what those ellipses from your earlier quote might (conveniently!) be omitting.

 

Excerpts from the Apostolic Circular on the Economy 1875

The First Presidency

and Council of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of

Latter-Day Saints

 

THE EXPERIENCE OF MANKIND has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Under such a system, carefully maintained there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest for money or property loaned, continued in force.

ONE OF THE GREAT EVILS with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are accomplished which, were it more equally distributed, would be impossible under our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both State, and National, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

YEARS AGO IT WAS PERCEIVED that we Latter-day Saints were open to the same dangers as those which beset the rest of the world. A condition of affairs existed among us which was favorable to the growth of riches in the hands of a few at the expense of many. A wealthy class was being rapidly formed in our midst whose interests in the course of time, were likely to be diverse from those of the rest of the community. The growth of such a class was dangerous to our union; and, of all people, we stand most in need of union and to have our interests identical. Then it was that the Saints were counseled to enter into co-operation. In the absence of the necessary faith to enter upon a more perfect order revealed by the Lord unto the Church, this was felt to be the best means of drawing us together and making us one.

A UNION OF INTERESTS was sought to be attained. At the time co-operation was entered upon the Latter-day Saints were acting in utter disregard of the principles of self-preservation. They were encouraging the growth of evils in their own midst which they condemned as the worst features of the systems from which they had been gathered. Large profits were being consecrated in comparatively few hands, instead of being generally distributed among the people. As a consequence, the community was being rapidly divided into classes, and the hateful and unhappy distinctions which the possession and lack of wealth give rise to, were becoming painfully apparent. When the proposition to organize Zion’s Co-operative Mercantile Institution was broached, it was hoped that the community at large would become stockholders; for if a few individuals only were to own its stock, the advantages to the community would be limited. The people, therefore, were urged to take shares, and large numbers responded to the appeal. As we have shown, the business proved to be as successful as its most sanguine friends anticipated. But the distribution of profits among the community was not the only benefit conferred by the organization of co-operation among us.

CO-OPERATION has submitted in silence to a great many attacks. Its friends have been content to let it endure the ordeal. But it is now time to speak. The Latter-day Saints should understand that it is our duty to sustain co-operation and to do all in our power to make it a success. The local co-operative stores should have the cordial support of the Latter-day Saints. Does not all our history impress upon us the great truth that in union is strength? Without it, what power would the Latter-day Saints have? But it is not our doctrines alone that we should be united, but in practice and especially in our business affairs.

1875

 

Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, Wilford Woodruff, Orson Pratt, Lorenzo Snow, Franklin D. Richards, Brigham Young Jr., George A. Smith, John taylor, Orson Hyde, Charles C,. Rich, Erastus Snow, George Q. Cannon, Albert Carrington

Your Brethren:

 

Excerpted from the Apostolic Circular of July 1875. The complete text can be found in Edward Jones Allen, The Second United Order Among the Mormons (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936).

Share this post


Link to post

Here is the Full Text 

History of Salt Lake City (1886)

https://archive.org/details/historyofsaltlak00tul

 

What do you think the church mean when it said, "If this evil should not be checked, and measures not be taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches "

 

 

 

" One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present
time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few indi-
viduals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and
courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endan-
gered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few
individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are
accomplished which, were it more equally distributed, would be impossible under
our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both state
and national, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and
measures not be taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among
the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the
poor, the nation is liable to be overtaken by disaster; for according to history,
such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.
The evidence of restiveness of the people under this condition of affairs in our
times is witnessed in the formation of societies, of granges, of patrons of hus-
bandry, trades' unions, etc., etc., combinations of the productive and working
classes against capital. '

" Years ago it was perceived that we Latter-day Saints were open to the same
dangers as those Avhich beset the rest of the world. A condition of affairs ex-
isted among us which was favorable to the growth of riches in the hands of a few
at the expense of the many. A wealthy class was being rapidly formed in our
midst whose interests, in the course of time, were likely to be diverse from those
of the rest of the community. The growth of such a class was dangerous to our
union and of all people, we stand most in need of union, and to have our inter,
ests identical. Then it was that the Saints were counseled to enter into co-opera-
tion. In the absence of the necessary faith to enter upon a more perfect order
revealed by the Lord unto the church, this was felt to be the best means of drawing
us together and making us one.

Share this post


Link to post

It is clear the First Presidency of 1875 did not support deregulated capitalism "If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent"

 

Wrong. The First Presidency never said who should be doing the checking. I think the evil needs to be checked and measures taken to prevent it as well. The question is who? Perhaps they meant the government, perhaps they meant the Church, perhaps they meant the individual. 

 

You don't know.

Share this post


Link to post

Wrong. The First Presidency never said who should be doing the checking. I think the evil needs to be checked and measures taken to prevent it as well. The question is who? Perhaps they meant the government, perhaps they meant the Church, perhaps they meant the individual. 

 

You don't know.

 

Keep reading, the church statement says 

 

 

The experience of mankind has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Under such a system, carefully maintained there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest for money or property loaned, continued in force.

 

 

"The experience of mankind has shown that the people of communities and nations, among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyrrany and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Among the chosen people of the Lord, to prevent the too rapid growth of wealth and its accumulation in a few hands, he ordained that in every seventh year the debtors were to be re- leased from their debts, and, where a man had sold himself to his brother, he was in that year to be released from slavery and to go free ; even the land itself which might pass out of the possession of its owner by his sale of it, whether through his improvidence, mismanagement, or misfortune, could only be alienated until the year of jubilee. At the expiration of every forty-nine years the land reverted, without cost to the m.an or family whose inheritance originally it was, except in the case of a dwelling house in a walled city, for the redemption of which, one year only was allowed, after which, if not redeemed, it became the property, without change at the year of jubilee, of the purchaser. Under such a system, carefully maintained, there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few ; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest far money or property loaned, continued in force. 

" One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present

time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few indi-

viduals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and

courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endan-

gered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few

individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are

accomplished which, were it more equally distributed, would be impossible under

our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both state

and national, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and

measures not be taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among

the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the

poor, the nation is liable to be overtaken by disaster; for according to history,

such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

The evidence of restiveness of the people under this condition of affairs in our

times is witnessed in the formation of societies, of granges, of patrons of hus-

bandry, trades' unions, etc., etc., combinations of the productive and working

classes against capital. '

" Years ago it was perceived that we Latter-day Saints were open to the same

dangers as those Avhich beset the rest of the world. A condition of affairs ex-

isted among us which was favorable to the growth of riches in the hands of a few

at the expense of the many. A wealthy class was being rapidly formed in our

midst whose interests, in the course of time, were likely to be diverse from those

of the rest of the community. The growth of such a class was dangerous to our

union and of all people, we stand most in need of union, and to have our inter,

ests identical. Then it was that the Saints were counseled to enter into co-opera-

tion. In the absence of the necessary faith to enter upon a more perfect order

revealed by the Lord unto the church, this was felt to be the best means of drawing

us together and making us one.

" Zion's Co-operative Mercantile Institution was organized, and, throughout

the Territory, the mercantile business of the various Wards and settlements was

organized after that pattern. Not only was the mercantile business thus organized,

but at various places branches of mechanical, manufacturing and other productive

industries were established upon this basis. To-day, therefore, co-operation among

us is no untried experiment. It has been tested, and whenever fairly tested, and

under proper management, its results have been most gratifying and fully equal to

all that was expected of it, though many attempts have been made to disparage

and decry it, to destroy the confidence of the people in it and have it prove a

failure. From the day that Zion's Co-operative Mercantile Institution was organ-

ized until this day it has had a formidable and combined opposition to contend

with, and the most base and unscrupulous methods have been adopted, by those

who have no interest for the welfare of the people, to destroy its credit. Without

alluding to the private assaults upon its credit which have been made by those

who felt that it was in their way and who wished to ruin it, the perusal alone of

the telegraphic dispatches and correFpondenre to newspapers which became public, 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian

Share this post


Link to post

It was my understanding that the Catholic position supported neither capitalis nor socialism, but rather distributism. It really seems to me what type of political system you wed with the economic system. Right now we seem to have moved towards oligarchy we'd to capitalism. But we may see a change in that given the populist revolt tha is gaining steam. I am not in favor of Soviet or Maoist style socialism, however, it may be necessary to bring certain countries out of the dark ages. I was surprised by a literacy map of the countries around Afghanistan. Those successfully occupied by the USSR during the Cold War had relatively high literacy rates, those which had been puppets of the U.S. Had abysmal rates. In which case it would appear that the average Afghan would have been better off if they had surrendered to the Soviets rather than fighting as American proxies.

Share this post


Link to post

Keep reading, the church statement says 

 

So the statement talks about laws prohibiting one type of means of gain (usury) which is a far cry from saying the government should be levying progressive taxes and redistributing wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...