The Pope - Round 2 - here we go again...

[lotstodo]

"The legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state". Some would argue that those who are against such things are probably against streetlights and public safety. They would be wrong. There are still others who would say that the Pope has gone full blown Commie. They would also be wrong. But the proponents of collectivism in all it's form can not simply use the fact that on the 1 to 10 scale of socialist thought he isn't a ten as a stand in for saying he isn't a state Socialist. He most certainly is. On a scale from Mcarthy to Marx, he is Francois Hollande. He blames Capitalism for the world's inequalities and intends to make it pay. he doesn't want to own it necessarily, but he certainly wants to bleed it dry. He simply does not have a firm grasp of economics.

No offense to you, because I do think you are pretty brilliant, but you do not know that. I also think he is a fairly smart man.

I do think the sound bites and the general misconception is that he is for communism, which I do not believe is correct and I think that he had broader meaning when you read his full statement and all his papers. Which, no need, I am not asking you to, I just think there is more to his statements and thoughts than bleeding capitalism.

Actually, I do know that. He could not have a good grasp of macroeconomics and make the anti capitalist remarks he has made. In fact his intentional use of the phrase "trickle-down economics" in the English translation is very telling. That is a derogatory term that has no real economic meaning. Capitalism is the ONLY economic system to raise the standards of the lowest members of the economy. Period. That fact is indisputable. He is simply wrong here. That doesn't mean he is stupid, just wrong. He is resurrecting Liberation Theology and using the very same Marxist inequality arguments used against the Military Fascists in the 60's to demand massive forced state redistribution now.

BTW I never even insinuated he is a Communist. He is a Democratic Socialist.

I agree. I don't see his position as malignant; I see him as one who has a lifelong obsession with and calling to help the poor, and coming from a culture that hasn't exactly embraced freedom, he errs in not understanding the true meaning of economic freedom and how that helps the poor.

That's what I should have said.

 

[mei lan]

"The legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state". Some would argue that those who are against such things are probably against streetlights and public safety. They would be wrong. There are still others who would say that the Pope has gone full blown Commie. They would also be wrong. But the proponents of collectivism in all it's form can not simply use the fact that on the 1 to 10 scale of socialist thought he isn't a ten as a stand in for saying he isn't a state Socialist. He most certainly is. On a scale from Mcarthy to Marx, he is Francois Hollande. He blames Capitalism for the world's inequalities and intends to make it pay. he doesn't want to own it necessarily, but he certainly wants to bleed it dry. He simply does not have a firm grasp of economics.

No offense to you, because I do think you are pretty brilliant, but you do not know that. I also think he is a fairly smart man.

I do think the sound bites and the general misconception is that he is for communism, which I do not believe is correct and I think that he had broader meaning when you read his full statement and all his papers. Which, no need, I am not asking you to, I just think there is more to his statements and thoughts than bleeding capitalism.

Actually, I do know that. He could not have a good grasp of macroeconomics and make the anti capitalist remarks he has made. In fact his intentional use of the phrase "trickle-down economics" in the English translation is very telling. That is a derogatory term that has no real economic meaning. Capitalism is the ONLY economic system to raise the standards of the lowest members of the economy. Period. That fact is indisputable. He is simply wrong here. That doesn't mean he is stupid, just wrong. He is resurrecting Liberation Theology and using the very same Marxist inequality arguments used against the Military Fascists in the 60's to demand massive forced state redistribution now.

BTW I never even insinuated he is a Communist. He is a Democratic Socialist.

I agree. I don't see his position as malignant; I see him as one who has a lifelong obsession with and calling to help the poor, and coming from a culture that hasn't exactly embraced freedom, he errs in not understanding the true meaning of economic freedom and how that helps the poor.

That's what I should have said.

Imma hafta faint now.

 

[mei lan]

Lucianne.com has the Pope going Old School on the devil story up on her Must Reads section for today. Below is a partial quote from comment #4 (Timber Queen, who is way yonder conservative):

P.S. Pope Francis is more “conservative” than he is portrayed by the Associated Press. I haven’t read anything in his statements, taken in their entirety, that deviate from the thousands of years of Catholic thought and theology. Although they are peppered with “lefty buzzwords” the Pontiff is using the words and phrases of today’s world stage that his audience will understand. Within his writings he re-redefines these concepts away from their current socialist connotations, and is challenging the stifling marxist status-quo. He is a smart man and I would not be surprised if he is using these buzzwords on purpose; to engage and then challenge the assumptions of socialism and, relying on the conservative’s virtue of not being swayed by the propaganda of big media, they would read the entire text of his comments.