Posted under Distributism
Note he says an Eastern European girl told him Communism and Capitalism are two sides of the same coin. And he says Switzerland can do this because it’s fairly homogenous. Though I’m not a progressive eugenicist, note that more than homogeneity is at issue here.
GK Chesterton, from the far west of Europe, once wrote:
There is nothing in front but a flat wilderness of standardization either by Bolshevism or Big Business. But it is strange that some of us should have seen sanity, if only in a vision, while the rest go forward chained eternally to enlargement without liberty and progress without hope.
There might be a better Chesterton quote, but that works.
I’m wary of guaranteeing money. Who would work? And Aristotle argued charity should be voluntary to encourage virtue. I suppose there’s always workfare (Paul speaks of useless government jobs. We might as well have them digging and refilling holes in the ground.)
However, the desire to preserve a middle class and reduce the extreme wealthy as well reduce the power capitalists have in our societies is a positive even if the means isn’t yet quite right. Some will argue societies pursuing raw Social Darwinism will get ahead, but a tendency in some countries is for only a small pool to even have opportunities. So, a distributist society could in theory pull from a larger pool of work.
In the US I like the policy of stopping immigration and protecting US industry, so that labour demand rises naturally. The rest of the world might then grow impoverished, but we’d be fine. Global resources are limited, and those who lack industry will trade raw materials. The state could wither away. At least protectionism would have worked when the US still had industry to protect.