Proclamation On The Economy

[Stone holm]

Will try to restart this topic and hopefully it won't wind up going overtly political and also that people with also will avoid making references and posting memes that wind up invoking Godwin's Law. The question is how did we, as a Church, manage to migrate from the ideals and understandings set forth in the Proclamation of the Economy to where we are now? How is it that so many Saints seem to think that unregulated capitalism is Divinely inspired? How is it that so many Saints seem to consider Adam Smith's "invisible hand" as something akin to a spiritual law? Where does this thinking come from Scripturally? Here is a link to excerpts of the Proclamation on the Economy, as far as I know, it has never been renounced.

http://www.ldscooperative.com/proclamation

[cinepro]

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 Proclamation on the Economy was renounced once "The Experience of Mankind" showed otherwise.

[Stone holm]

The Proclamation on the Economy was renounced once "The Experience of Mankind" showed otherwise.

Was that by all of Mankind or any particular Church administration...lol

[pmccombs1]

Will try to restart this topic and hopefully it won't wind up going overtly political and also that people with also will avoid making references and posting memes that wind up invoking Godwin's Law. The question is how did we, as a Church, manage to migrate from the ideals and understandings set forth in the Proclamation of the Economy to where we are now? How is it that so many Saints seem to think that unregulated capitalism is Divinely inspired? How is it that so many Saints seem to consider Adam Smith's "invisible hand" as something akin to a spiritual law? Where does this thinking come from Scripturally? Here is a link to excerpts of the Proclamation on the Economy, as far as I know, it has never been renounced.

http://www.ldscooper...om/proclamation

Not only did the early Church brethren receive this guidance, but those of the Catholic faith (and others) as well. In the same vein as the Proclamation on the Economy:

Rerum Novarum

Quadragesimo Anno

[Stone holm]

Not only did the early Church brethren receive this guidance, but those of the Catholic faith (and others) as well. In the same vein as the Proclamation on the Economy:

Rerum Novarum

Quadragesimo Anno

I believe Pope Benedict said something about it right before his abdication.

[pmccombs1]

I believe Pope Benedict said something about it right before his abdication.

Yes, the Catholics (and Anglicans, and Buddhists...) have always had top-notch ideas about economics. I've been a little bit bummed about the poverty of LDS thought around the matter, and our penchant for wrapping up the present commercial capitalism as the best God has for us (it's not perfect, its proponents will say, but it's "the best thing out there." Ugh!).

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Will try to restart this topic and hopefully it won't wind up going overtly political and also that people with also will avoid making references and posting memes that wind up invoking Godwin's Law. The question is how did we, as a Church, manage to migrate from the ideals and understandings set forth in the Proclamation of the Economy to where we are now?

Maye because up until about a few months ago I had never heard of the proclamation of the economy. It appears to have not been very inspirational. Just a guess of course.

How is it that so many Saints seem to think that unregulated capitalism is Divinely inspired?

Mainly because I was under the impression that that was the whole point of this life. Is to come down here and "choose ye this day whom ye are to serve". When regulation is imposed it appears that freedom is lost. I am for more freedom not less. And the best way to deal wtih any issue is through education. Not by passing some dumb law.

How is it that so many Saints seem to consider Adam Smith's "invisible hand" as something akin to a spiritual law?

Not sure many do. I have never once read Adam Smith. I know who he is but that is about it. I think that many Saint's understand the alternative and know were we came from. I am sorry but there is not one person in here that is going to convince me that socialism or communisim is a better system. IT all comes down to freedom.

Where does this thinking come from Scripturally?

I would try Genesis, Abraham and Moses, were we learn why we are here. This life is a test to see if we will chose to do all that God asked us. If we applied a socialist, or communist mentality to this system we should have chosen Satan's plan. Were we would be regulated into obediance.

Here is a link to excerpts of the Proclamation on the Economy, as far as I know, it has never been renounced.

http://www.ldscooper...om/proclamation

Though this is true (I guess), I have never once heard it talked about in my life that I am aware of. What does that say about how the church feels about it?

Edited May 6, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[thesometimesaint]

Will try to restart this topic and hopefully it won't wind up going overtly political and also that people with also will avoid making references and posting memes that wind up invoking Godwin's Law. The question is how did we, as a Church, manage to migrate from the ideals and understandings set forth in the Proclamation of the Economy to where we are now? How is it that so many Saints seem to think that unregulated capitalism is Divinely inspired? How is it that so many Saints seem to consider Adam Smith's "invisible hand" as something akin to a spiritual law? Where does this thinking come from Scripturally? Here is a link to excerpts of the Proclamation on the Economy, as far as I know, it has never been renounced.

http://www.ldscooper...om/proclamation

Amen. The allure of mammon is a constant refrain in Scripture and writings of the Prophets. We ignore them at our peril.

[pmccombs1]

Not sure many do. I have never once read Adam Smith. I know who he is but that is about it. I think that many Saint's understand the an alternative and know were we came from. I am sorry but there is not one person in here that is going to convince me that socialism or communisim is a better system. IT all comes down to freedom.

Fixed that for ya.

[thesometimesaint]

Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose.

[Stone holm]

Maye because up until about a few months ago I had never heard of the proclamation of the economy. It appears to have not been very inspirational. Just a guess of course.

Mainly because I was under the impression that that was the whole point of this life. Is to come down here and "choose ye this day whom ye are to serve". When regulation is imposed it appears that freedom is lost. I am for more freedom not less. And the best way to deal wtih any issue is through education. Not by passing some dumb law.

Not sure many do. I have never once read Adam Smith. I know who he is but that is about it. I think that many Saint's understand the alternative and know were we came from. I am sorry but there is not one person in here that is going to convince me that socialism or communisim is a better system. IT all comes down to freedom.

I would try Genesis, Abraham and Moses, were we learn why we are here. This life is a test to see if we will chose to do all that God asked us. If we applied a socialist, or communist mentality to this system we should have chosen Satan's plan. Were we would be regulated into obediance.

Though this is true (I guess), I have never once heard it talked about in my life that I am aware of. What does that say about how the church feels about it?

Not sure how a person could support free market capitalism without at least some notion of Adam Smith's invisible hand since that is the justification for free markets. Which also, I believe, is why the Proclamation on the Economy describes the danger of concentrated wealth. Note also that the Church in this proclamation talks about the problems of the laws of the nation including corporate laws. This was at the commencement of the Robber Baron era, which has considerable relevance to today.

[cinepro]

Not sure how a person could support free market capitalism without at least some notion of Adam Smith's invisible hand since that is the justification for free markets. Which also, I believe, is why the Proclamation on the Economy describes the danger of concentrated wealth. Note also that the Church in this proclamation talks about the problems of the laws of the nation including corporate laws. This was at the commencement of the Robber Baron era, which has considerable relevance to today.

Just so I'm clear, we're talking about a Church that is itself incorporated, and gets a great deal of its work done by unpaid volunteers (who are also asked to donate 10% of their increase to the corporation)?

This also being the same Church that was recently instrumental in building a huge shopping mall as an investment to increase their corporate wealth?

If you're concerned about LDS members presenting mixed messages about wealth, economics, and "free markets", I think I know where those mixed messages might be coming from.

Edited May 6, 2013 by cinepro

[pmccombs1]

Not sure how a person could support free market capitalism without at least some notion of Adam Smith's invisible hand since that is the justification for free markets. Which also, I believe, is why the Proclamation on the Economy describes the danger of concentrated wealth. Note also that the Church in this proclamation talks about the problems of the laws of the nation including corporate laws. This was at the commencement of the Robber Baron era, which has considerable relevance to today.

So, I spent a year studying Adam Smith. The "invisible hand" first appeared in his book entitled, "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" in which Adam Smith explains how morality arises from fellow-feeling (which he also called "sympathy").

The scenario for the concept of the invisible hand is interesting. The wealthy land owner amassed more than he could use, therefore it had to be distributed among the household. Thus, the benevolence of wealth redistribution was tied to the nature of the old economy in which goods were not abstractions. It wasn't the mature money economy... you used stuff, or it went to waste. There wasn't much point in hoarding.

With the modern money economy, and the potential for boundless hoarding of abstract values, the invisible hand has lost its principle characteristic that made it benevolent by Adam Smith's terms.

There is an invisible hand, alright. Smith's genius was in casting some light on the nature of Emergent Complexity. The Invisible Hand today tends toward globalization and individualism, and away from close knit families and communities. It is an instrument of negative liberty and the disrupting of bonds, rather than of positive liberty and the forging of bonds.

[pmccombs1]

If you're concerned about LDS members presenting mixed messages about wealth, economics, and "free markets", I think I know where those mixed messages might be coming from.

I'm afraid you're right...

[Sine Saw Square]

And what is stopping any one living according to the economic view expressed in this pamphlet if that person feels so inclined?

[Avatar4321]

Yes, the Catholics (and Anglicans, and Buddhists...) have always had top-notch ideas about economics. I've been a little bit bummed about the poverty of LDS thought around the matter, and our penchant for wrapping up the present commercial capitalism as the best God has for us (it's not perfect, its proponents will say, but it's "the best thing out there." Ugh!).

What is bad about people being free to purchase what they want and need or to labor for their needs?

[Stone holm]

So, I spent a year studying Adam Smith. The "invisible hand" first appeared in his book entitled, "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" in which Adam Smith explains how morality arises from fellow-feeling (which he also called "sympathy").

The scenario for the concept of the invisible hand is interesting. The wealthy land owner amassed more than he could use, therefore it had to be distributed among the household. Thus, the benevolence of wealth redistribution was tied to the nature of the old economy in which goods were not abstractions. It wasn't the mature money economy... you used stuff, or it went to waste. There wasn't much point in hoarding.

With the modern money economy, and the potential for boundless hoarding of abstract values, the invisible hand has lost its principle characteristic that made it benevolent by Adam Smith's terms.

There is an invisible hand, alright. Smith's genius was in casting some light on the nature of Emergent Complexity. The Invisible Hand today tends toward globalization and individualism, and away from close knit families and communities. It is an instrument of negative liberty and the disrupting of bonds, rather than of positive liberty and the forging of bonds.

Well I believe there is still some validity to the invisible hand to do good, but only in an economic system where wealth does not become unduly concentrated. I view it basically as a voting booth and it is important that the ballots, which are dollars, not be overly concentrated. So when you have a strong and vibrant middle class like we did in the 50's it worked fairly well. But it did not work well in the 1890's and its not working well now.

[pmccombs1]

And what is stopping any one living according to the economic view expressed in this pamphlet if that person feels so inclined?

The lack of cohesive families and communities, for starters. The economy outlined in the pamphlet isn't about "any one." Economy is about the household and the neighborhood.

[pmccombs1]

What is bad about people being free to purchase what they want and need or to labor for their needs?

Did I suggest there was something wrong with that? I'm missing something...

[Stone holm]

What is bad about people being free to purchase what they want and need or to labor for their needs?

Nothing did you read the First Presidency Proclamation? That isn't what this is about.

[Stone holm]

The lack of cohesive families and communities, for starters. The economy outlined in the pamphlet isn't about "any one." Economy is about the household and the neighborhood.

Bingo it's about communitarianism.

[Stone holm]

And what is stopping any one living according to the economic view expressed in this pamphlet if that person feels so inclined?

Better question is why aren't the Latter Day Saints living this as a united community as the Brethren called for? Remember they are not calling for the United Order here, they are just decrying excess accumulation of wealth and concentration of wealth in the nation. Something more and more economists and sociologists are pointing out today to be part of the problem. But the Brethren nailed it more than a hundred years ago during the last time wealth became over concentrated.

[Avatar4321]

Did I suggest there was something wrong with that? I'm missing something...

you are complaining about capitalism which is merely people freely exchanging goods and services with one another. What is wrong with doing that?

[Stone holm]

you are complaining about capitalism which is merely people freely exchanging goods and services with one another. What is wrong with doing that?

Actually, that is an over simplification of capitalism. What capitalism in a free market is suppose to be doing is seeing to the orderly allocation and use of resources via free market principles which in theory will benefit the common good. And it can work, if wealth does not become too concentrated and if labor is allowed to freely organize or you have a frontier where labor can pack up and move to. On the other hand if labor is primarily coming from a quasi enslaved people such as China not sure it works that well.

[Sosthenes]

This was not called a "Proclamation" and it was not titled "Proclamation on the Economy". It is described in the "History of Salt Lake City" by Edward William Tullidge (1886) as an "encyclical" on "Cooperation".

Even though it contains the signatures of Brigham Young and others, It was not signed as though it were officially by the First Presidency and the 12 in that office. Instead it was signed by them as "your brethren".

The original title was "ZION'S CO-OPERATIVE MERCANTILE INSTITUTION". It was a pamphlet. Reading the full text, it does not look like a Church doctrinal document. The link does not show the full text of the pamphlet but when the full text is read, it appears to be a marketing brochure designed to sell the stock in the ZCMI corporation to the people in the Utah Valley and using the type of language of the 1800's to induce people to buy stock as a means of mutually beneficial financial enrichment.

The arguments used in it were these:

* it is bad to be in debt and good to own things.

* it is bad for a few people to own things, because that brings an unhealthy difference of wealth among the people.

* the people of the Salt Lake Valley are subject to the whims of powerful interests in railroads or trade guilds who may cause scarcity in the remote valley and then raise prices

* members of the Church did not have faith to follow the United Order, but they could follow this lesser "cooperation" practice that could remedy these ills.

* Zions Cooperative Mercantile is a proven, stable method for achieving this goal and obeying the commandment of Brigham Young for cooperation.

* Investment in ZCMI produced a return on investment of 200% in less than 5 years.

* ZCMI has also benefited the community at large, even without investment.

* ZCMI needs more capital to build a building and to obtain purchasing power to continue to benefit shareholders and the community.

* All the members of the Church should invest so that these goals can be achieved and so that the return of profits do not go to just a few people.

The History of Salt Lake City says:" It was a statement by the Church relative to Z.C.M.I. as an established success of the Mormon people in co-operation, and to stimulate the community to perpetuate its existence."

Relevant information from the Internet may be found at these places:

Wikipedia article on ZCMI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zions_Cooperative_Mercantile_Institution

History of Salt Lake City (with the complete text of this pamphlet)

http://books.google.com/books?id=DBU1AQAAMAAJ&dq=History+of+Salt+Lake+City++By+Edward+William+Tullidge&source=gbs_navlinks_s (page 728 and onward)

Original Talk by Brigham Young on the concept of cooperative stores and their benefits in a talk entitled: "Cooperation". (This talk is referred to in the pamphlet)

http://jod.mrm.org/12/372

Orson Scott Card's analysis that this historical information has often been misrepresented:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700259567/Document-does-fine-on-its-own.html?pg=all