The Catholic Populist

Labor Force Growth in the Developed World

A few hours ago, the New York Times authoritatively announced that the European Union has staved off financial disaster.  German Prime Minister Angela Merkel is hailed as a hero by many in the European media!  The long and the short of it is, they are giving Greece a break on some of its debt.  Now, the EU can go back to growing their economy in peace …

Do not believe a single word of it.

The European Union is heading over an economic cliff.  And no one wants to admit it.

They are going where only Japan has ever gone before: first into entrepreneurship decline (predominantly people aged 25 – 45), then into labor force decline (predominantly people 18 – 65), and ultimately into population decline (no explanation needed).

Japan was the first to go all the way through the process.  Now, the declining population has resulted in declining real estate value.  Every family with a house or business with property is finding that its most fundamental investment (real estate) is becoming more worthless every year.  The aging population has caused Japan to have a debt to Gross Domestic Product ratio of 197.5%.  They have almost twice as much debt as their entire economy produces in a year.  And they are paying interest on all that debt.

Europe is walking down the same path.

What caused the decline in birth rates pushing the developed world towards population decline?  Was it the invention of the Pill, a common belief?

No.  John Mueller analyzed this claim in his excellent book Redeeming Economics.

Since the introduction of contraception, the pregnancy rates have remained steady.

Contraceptives have not decreased the number of unwanted pregnancies at all.  This was actually predicted before-handed by both Planned Parenthood and the Catholic Church.  However, since Roe v. Wade, roughly one in three pregnancies end in abortion.  The entire decrease in babies and the resulting aging of the population is due exclusively to abortion.

But the entire developed world (except a few outliers like Poland and Ireland) has legal abortion.  What makes the United States different?  Why aren’t we going over the demographic cliff, too?  Does something set us apart from Japan, China, and Europe?

Yes.  Japan, China, and the nations of Europe were built on ethnic nationalism — the idea that because they share the same culture and heritage, they should act in collective self-interest.  The United States was rather founded on the ideas found in the Declaration of Independence.  Catholic British thinker G.K. Chesterton said: “America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed.”  Because we were founded on a creed, immigration is a rich part of American heritage.  Immigrants who believe the creed can truly become Americans.  The same is not as true of an immigrant to an ethnic nation like France.  But here waves of  immigrants — the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Latinos — have entered this country and now serve as a shield against the effects of abortion.  Japan has no legal immigration while Europe’s immigrants are insufficient to stabilize the median age.

Does this mean that the United States was not hurt economically by abortion?

Absolutely not.  When Roe v. Wade was legalized in 1973, the workforce did not immediately feel the adverse effects of abortion.  The United States last reformed its immigration laws in 1986 (which included the Reagan amnesty for the 3 million illegal immigrants here at that time).  However, in the early 1990s, the economy began to feel the pinch.  A third of the workers that would have entered the marketplace at that time had been aborted.  The dearth of young workers spawned the first waves of illegal immigrants.

Now, decades after Roe, the median age of whites in the U.S. has aged to 41.  However, the median age for Latinos in the country is 27.  The US business community has become fiercely pro-immigration — lobbying for non-enforcement of punitive immigration laws, increased guest worker passes, and increased levels of legal immigration.  As the US ages (albeit more slowly than the rest of the developed world), the marketplace is increasingly ravenous for young workers and 20 million illegal immigrants currently live in the country, work, and pay taxes.  Latinos also have significantly higher birth rates than whites.

Thus, when GOP Presidential candidates insist on “controlling the border first,” they are being naive or disingenuous.  Controlling the border first would deny a ravenous market demand for young workers utterly unsatiated by current levels of legal immigration.  They might as well say they are intent on “controlling the market first.”  The only way that controlling the border would be affordable or even desirable would be to first adjust the levels of legal immigration to account for the demographic shift caused by abortion.

Then on to the big battle of overturning Roe v. Wade.

The Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice Is Causing John Paul the Great to Roll Over In His Grave

John Paul the Great led the Church in its battle to bring about the fall of the the Soviet Union by creating a spiritual and cultural renewal inside the Berlin Wall.

Many decades have passed since the Church won that battle in 1989.

The Church worked hard to defeat Socialism (a centrally managed economy) in the Soviet Union.  Now, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace is advocating for a World Fed — a centrally managed currency.  Isn’t this a clear step towards Global Socialism?

Was the Church’s battle against the Soviet Union a temporary battle necessary to protect Catholic liberty in a particular atheist country?  Or did the Church authoritatively condemn Socialism and its cousin the Social Welfare State (which we have in the US) on principle?

Who should Catholics believe — John Paul II, who worked to oppose and strip power from Socialist governments and the Social Welfare states?  Or the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, which wants to centralize power even more than ever before?

During the height of the Cold War, in 1971, Richard Nixon took the United States off of the gold-exchange standard (a poor-man’s substitute for the true classical gold standard), giving government enormous power that it had never previously possessed.  The US government was able to run escalating federal deficits, grow enormous trade deficits, flood the country with foreign goods, and then ship bonds and dollars to foreign creditors flush with dollars from American consumers.  Next thing we knew, the US government was piling on mountains of debt on future generations of American children in order to build a social welfare state at the expense of current American jobs.

America’s easing off of the gold standard — culminating in the radical jump to full fiat currency in 1971 — allowed the US government to accrue power to build a Social Welfare State.  It helped several European and East Asian countries  with currencies pegged to the suddenly floating dollar to build Socialist states.  Low on money?  Go to the national bank.

Now, the Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice calls for a massive monetary, regulatory, and tax authority to be given enormous centralized power — a long-held dream of many Socialist European central planners.  It is our duty to issue a fraternal correction to the Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice informing them of the way in which (clueless and well-meaning as they may be) their plan violates Catholic Social Teaching.  Fraternal correction (recommended by Saint Paul to those that stray from orthodoxy) is not an act of belligerence but of charity — both to the corrected individual and to the Church at large.

This recommendation is obviously a textbook violation of the principle of subsidiarity.  It is clear that a centrally managed currency empowers governments to build Socialist and Social Welfare states.  Fallen human nature says that a government wielding a limitless credit card will spend a lot of money.  But has the Magisterium (which, unlike Notas issued by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, actually does bind Catholic consciences) condemned the Socialist or Social Welfare states created by fiat currency?

Let’s see:

Leo XIII, founder of Catholic Social Teaching, in Quod Apostolici Muneris (On Socialism):

“You understand, venerable brethren, that We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning — the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever.”

A bit strong?  Pope Leo XIII designated Socialism as in direct violation of Catholic Social Teaching and openly proclaimed that a society sought by Socialists was certainly not civil.

What about the US?  Fiat currency has built a Social Welfare State but not a full-fledged Socialist state.  What does the Magisterium say about that?

John Paul the Great in his Social Encyclical Centesimus Annus (The Hundredth Anniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum):

“In recent years the range of such intervention has vastly expanded, to the point of creating a new type of State, the so-called “Welfare State”… Malfunctions and defects in the Social Assistance State are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the State. Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected … the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending. In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbors to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need.”

And that, my friends, remains the official Social Teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

It is time for the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace to take the time to study and understand this important issue.

The Vatican Reveals Un-Catholic Clericalist Tendencies

The radical recommendations of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace show an extraordinary level of clericalism.

What is clericalism?

Clericalism is a form of elitism that holds that priests (clerics) are better at managing the affairs of lay people than lay people are at managing their own affairs.

What is elitism?

Elitism is the idea that expert elites are better at managing the lives of the populace than the more ignorant populace would be at managing their own affairs.

Who are the elites that elitists think should be put in charge of the affairs of the populace?

Elitists believe that people at the top of each respective field — attorneys, psychologists, engineers, professors, accountants, physicians, etc. — should be empowered by government to make decisions for everyone else within each expert’s field of expertise.  This is often referred to as a managed economy.

What is the anti-elitist philosophy?

The anti-elitist philosophy is called populism.  It holds that the populace is better at managing its own affairs than expert elites would be at managing their affairs for them.

Are all elites elitist?

Absolutely not.  Elites do tend to be elitist due to fallen human nature and an often well-meaning desire to minimize the risk of the populace making mistakes in their respective fields of expertise that they would never make.  Elitism also has the tempting allure of giving elites additional power.  However, some elites are populist.

What percentage of Americans are elites?

It is hard to say for certain but a remarkably large amount of Americans are elites.  The more developed and diversified an economy is, the more fields there are in which a person can rise to the highest level.  America has one of the best economies in human history so a significant minority of Americans are elites.

Is everyone in the populace populist?

The populace is defined as the non-elites.  The answer is no.  Some in the populace have an infantile belief that some expert should come in and fix all their problems.  But the majority of the populace (and, as a result, the majority of Americans) are populist.  That is why the majority of Americans believe that the gold standard should replace the central management of the Fed — an idea considered somewhat fringe (although slowly gaining traction) among Washington elites.

Back to clericalism!  Are all clericalists priests?

No.  Laypeople can be clericalist and so can non-Catholics.

What do clericalists tend to believe?

Non-Catholic clericalists tend to believe that only priests represent the Catholic Church — writing as if lay people were mere spectators of the Church — often referring to “the Church hierarchy” as if its members were from a different species than the laity.  Lay clericalists tend to believe that priests should be held to high moral standards that they themselves do not need to hold.  Priestly clericalists (like Cardinal Turkson of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace) believe that not only should priests provide Church teaching and the sacraments but also give lay people directives on exactly which specific policies they should undertake.  However, when it comes right down to it, all clericalists tend to share all three of these beliefs.

Is it surprising that a clericalist document would endorse elitist policy proscriptions such as creating a World Fed and world taxes?

Not in the slightest.  Since clericalism is a form of elitism, clericalists will be inclined to endorse elitist policy.

What does the Church teach about clericalism?

Catholic Social Teaching is fiercely opposed to clericalism or any form of elitism.  It teaches that subsidiarity should guide all policy decisions.  Subsidiarity is the principle that all decisions should be as populist as possible.  Thus, all efforts should be made to decentralize decision-making rather than centralizing decision-making.

Furthermore, Vatican II emphasized the Universal Call to Holiness.  In other words, not only clerics but also lay people are called to passionately live their Catholic faith and become saints.  Provided that clerics are providing excellent formation and the sacraments, lay Catholics and even non-Catholics can put Catholic Social Teaching into effect without being told which specific policy actions to take.

The Church does teach doctrine.  How does it do so?

The Church has been in a 2,000 year dialogue with the world developing and refining dogma that has been handed down by Jesus Christ.  It acts with the authority of the Magisterium.  There are many levels of developing doctrine — some gradual and some instantaneous — Scripture, Vatican Councils, ex Cathedra statements, encyclicals (like the one the document quoted that refuted its entire argument), Apostolic Exhortations, the Catechism, etc.

How much Magisterial authority does this document have?

None.  Zero.  Zilch.  It has no authority in the Magisterium at all.

So how should Catholics react?

When the Vatican issues a clericalist policy recommendation that has no authority from the Magisterium but is in fact in conflict with the Catholic Social Teaching, Catholics are required to condemn that document.

It’s the only Catholic thing to do.