“All Socialism is, is collective ownership and government control of the means of production.”
This came from a well-educated, young man, a self-avowed “Socialist”, who calls himself “Catholic”, straight out of one of the West Coast’s most prestigious institutes of higher learning. He said it in reply to my assertion that Socialism starts from a radical, metaphysical egalitarianism. His rebuff to my assertion was to reduce Socialism to its conclusion, conveniently skipping over the philosophical foundations of a divergent and complex ideology. This, sadly, is an exercise that liberal Catholics are particularly adept.
Perhaps liberal Catholics simply want to avoid the bigger questions for which they have no ready-made, mob like slogan to chant in reply. Questions such as: Why is it that a Catholic socialist would think that we would be better off without private property or private control of the means of production? Once that question is asked, then we get to the real nitty-gritty of Socialism. All Socialists, from Marx to Harrington, have to admit, and for the most part happily, that the eradication of private property and industry is to achieve a guaranteed, basic standard of living. Everyone must be equal in both nature (which is a given) and in accident (which is erroneous); in other words, everyone must be guaranteed equality of outcome. However, does this fit with Catholicism?
Catholicism entails a belief in a Divine Being, and a Divine Being flies in the face of radical, metaphysical egalitarianism. The existence of God bespeaks hierarchy, which entails, necessarily, a radical, metaphysical inequality. Marx, at least, was honest enough to jettison and ridicule belief in God. A Catholic socialist is unwilling to see the contradiction in applying such diametrically opposed distinctions upon himself. The Catholic socialist is merely a “cultural” Catholic, but he is also, just as disingenuously socialist; he's a mere “practicing” Socialist who accepts the conclusion, but not the philosophical foundation that gives any meaning to the conclusion. A Catholic socialist is unwilling to delve into the philosophical underpinnings of the slogans he’s chosen to apply to himself, being content to sail on the surface of a pseudo-intellectual sea of sophisticated words with Greek roots and long definitions. It is, to put it at bit differently, a belief system that is philologically highbrow, but philosophically pedestrian.
However, it’s comfortable, especially for the academic elite, who can’t be bothered with practical questions that threaten to topple their self-image and self-proclaimed cultural authority.
It should not come as a big surprise that every liberal Catholic or Catholic socialist I’ve ever met are at the same time “pro-abortion Catholics”. This is no accident. They are inseparable from each other. Some liberal Catholics simply enjoy and wish to justify their sexual immorality, which means they start out pro-contraception, and end up, inevitably, pro-abortion.
Others, however, see themselves as compassionate, and it is their compassion that makes them pro-abortion, pro-birth control, pro-population control. I once heard a liberal Catholic utter, “at least we won’t let a baby be born into poverty”.
At least we won’t let a baby be born…??
I often hear the term “bleeding-heart liberals” from my more conservative friends, but I have never actually met one. I’ve known no bleeding-hearts who were liberal. Why is it that a liberal’s “compassionate” solution to so many problems is mutilation of a woman’s body or the extermination of innocent and vulnerable human beings? All liberal compassion is basically the same as a Stalin’s compassion or Mao’s compassion or Hitler’s compassion. Their “compassion” is nothing more than mutilation and murder.
What are they really saying when they say they won’t let a baby be born into poverty? What the liberal, pro-abortion, socialist “Catholic” is saying is that it is far better to kill a baby than have to take care of that person if they should suffer. This is the moral roots of the socialist ideology. Radical, metaphysical egalitarianism, a utopia of equal results, without suffering or the redemption that can come from it, springs from a moral depravity, which is hate born of sloth, the opposite of love for neighbor. It is better to kill an innocent and vulnerable human being than to be bothered with having to show charity to it.
It is far easier to live in contraction, with appellations like "Catholic socialist" or "liberal Catholic", than to live convicted by faith. It is easier to rid one’s self of inconveniences, like babies born into poverty, and call it something intelligent sounding, than it is for one to practice charity and true compassion while getting their hands dirty with caring for the poor, the sick, and the disenfranchised. Servant of the poor may not sound noble or academic, but for that there will be Heaven to pay.
It was far easier for the crowds to mock Christ, than it was for Veronica to brave the rebuffs of the centurions to show compassion to the suffering Christ. Today’s liberal Catholic and Catholic socialist mocks Christ, and what's more he mocks Veronica. He shows no mercy to those who might inconvenience him. The liberal Catholic insults Our Blessed Lord with his easy, slothful, form of compassion that advocates mutilation and murder over self-sacrificing, true compassion, and for that there will be Hell to pay.