I'm not a full-blown distributist, but this piece from Durendal makes good points none-the-less. A Short Answer to John Grasmeier Austrian School Advocate
By N.D.C. Wansbutter, Esq.
I don't often write on economics on this blog because, frankly, I'm somewhat out of my element in that regard having never formally studied economics. Anything I'd post would therefore be little more than restating what wiser and more learned men have written on the topic. Unfortunately, among traditionalist Catholics, there are many who hold views starkly at odds with the teachings of the popes and the learned men (both lay and clerical) who I would quote from were I to do a post restating what others have written. And so it is that I feel the need to foray into this field according to my means.
I've been publicly on record saying that I lost a lot of respect for Christopher Ferrara, Esq. when he called the Pope's capitulation to the Jєωs on the Good Friday prayer a "master stroke", but this recent article brought him back up a few notches in my estimation of him:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-0215-ferrara-ludwig_von_mises_versus_christ.htmOf course, the usual suspects rallied angrily to Dr. Woods and the Austrian School's defence. Chief among them being John Grasmeier, owner of the largest English-speaking traditionalist Catholic message board on the internet. Now, certainly he is well within his rights to express an opinion and exert his authority over the group he owns (which is why I am not posting this there -- my economic views being seen as a sort of dangerous heresy). Yet his strongly laissez-faire capitalist views will influence many, so I would answer some of his charges in this post.
Now firstly, generally whenever Mr. Grasmeier engages in a discussion of economics, he accuses the detractors of Austrian School economics with something to the tune of "let me guess: You're an Obama staffer or a distributist." Let me say at the outset that, while I do not think that one must be a member of one of these two groups to have difficulties with Austrian School economics, I am a Distributist (or at least attempt to be). Having dealt with that, I'll move on. In taking Chris Ferrara, Esq. to task, Mr. Grasmeier stated:
What I notice about those who argue against free-markets and property rights is that they never bother to let on what exactly it is that they would replace such a system (a system rooted in CATHOLIC MONARCHIES) with or how it would work. (cf.
http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30054I have no formal schooling in economics. I do, however, have a Bachelor of Arts in History (with a focus on mediæval history) and have continued to update my knowledge in that field as a hobby ever since. Mr. Grasmeier is not the first to make the claim that the modern laissez-fair free market economy is mediæval and "rooted in the Catholic Monarchies". Dr. Woods makes the same claim in his book How the Catholic Church Built Civilization (which is a good book when he's not twisting the facts to conform with his un-Catholic economic beliefs).
Laissez-faire capitalism (as promoted by the Austrian School) simply did not exist in the Middle Ages. Time and space are short so I'll offer but a few arguments. My fellow editor, Mr. Amesse, gave an standard example in his post "King Edward's Economics". Another consideration would be that of the guilds (which depended on grants of letters patent from the Catholic monarchs to exist), inwhich we find, if I may say, the antithesis of Austrian school economics: price fixing, monopolies, strict quality control, and trade restrictions to name just a few examples. A final consideration would be the fact that usury was illegal.
As to the second point, the charge that we Distributists (for that is generally who I believe he is directing his comments towards) do not suggest a concrete alternative. Mr. Grasmeier takes this up a few times in his post:
... how do you plan on disassembling the secular/statist/socialist monster if not by defunding it and the international bankster cartel that enables it? FYI, the Austrians - and men like Tom Woods - are the only ones who espouse viable, real-world, here-and-now means of doing so.I think all Distributists must concede that in the current milieu, there is no "quick fix" that we can offer. Like monarchists, we recognize that our theories are not suited to be applied immediately (for a King Obama would be only mildly less dangerous than President Obama) -- this, however, does not render the theory useless. A long term, slow process of change is necessary. I think that a reintroduction of guilds (something along the lines of the Corporations instituted by Chancellor Dollfuß in Austria would be a first step.
Of course, I have no delusions about Distributist economic policy ever gaining traction in the modern democratic process which I believe I have accurately called "Lucifer's Lottery". The media would never allow it. They might allow laissez-faire economics because these economics are not really a threat. A distributist economy will emerge, rather, organically, as it did the first time in the early Middle Ages. Likely in the wake of a cataclysmic economic chastisement. Or perhaps through a more modest, and drawn out battle fought one family at a time weaning itself off the mega corporations, producing for themselves, trading with other like-minded individuals, &c. This latter may not be totally far-fetched as there seems to be growing support for such idea. Alas, often among leftist and hippie-types, but Mr. Grasmeier took Chris Ferrara, Esq. sharply to task for ad hominem attacks so I trust that the liberal inclinations of some others inclined towards Distributism will not be held against us.
Posted on the Feast of St. John of Matha, Confessor, a.D. MMX
http://rencesvals.blogspot.com/2010/02/short-answer-to-john-grasmeier-austrian.html