Perspectives of a Wanderer

Yesterday, I wrote on self-sufficiency in an entry titled “Transforming Society – Self-sufficiency”.  This is kind of a follow-up on that post.

Today, I decided to go to the Michigan Renaissance Festival that is near where I live.  For those who have never been to a Renaissance fair, it is a themed event that loosely emulates some period in the Renaissance period (14^th – 17^th Century) usually England.  I say loosely, since it is mainly a gathering of artisans and performers whose theme based on the period.  Other than that, there is not much in common for the period.

Once you get past the bawdiness of some of the performers and crafts, you can learn a lot about different crafts that can be used for everyday living and also how small and individual businesses operate.  Some of the items I saw of interest varied from mugs, candles, honey, and even soap.

Now, I know what some will say, what does this have do with self-sufficiency.  Not much unless you look at things one can make that they normally buy in stores.  Lets concentrate on one item, soap.  The soaps there were made from various ingredients from beeswax, goats mild, olive oil, and honey.  Many of these ingredients that can be produced by the individual if they have the resources (many can come from a garden and/or small farm) and the knowledge and patience to do so.

The second thing is that many of the artisans at these Renaissance fairs own their own businesses that produce the goods they sell.  Although it is not based on Distributive principles, it does show how one can run their own business, do what they like, and make a living at it.  One can get inspiration from this to do the same thing.

Finally, a Renaissance fair shows a kind of cooperative or community atmosphere.  It takes a lot to get and organize a diverse group of relatively independent people together for a specific number of weekends each year.  Although it is a completely different concept, a community or cooperative based on a Distributive economic and rooted in Catholic Moral and Social teachings, one can learn a lot from a Renaissance fair on how to come together to start and work towards a goal.

We can learn a lot from a Renaissance fare.  However, it is how we put this knowledge to use that is important.

In “Modern Society Must be Transformed or Must Fall” and “We Need a God Based Society”, I wrote about two topics about going back to a previous timeframe to start restoring the moral foundation of society.  Now, it is time to start thinking about how to strengthen that foundation.  The first way is to restore man’s self-sufficiency.

Now, I know what some will say; “Man is a social creature”.  What I am saying is not becoming a hermit and living apart from other people (although I feel like doing that a lot these days).  What I am talking about is how we provide for our basic needs.

Three of the plagues I have written about, in my opinion, undermine self-sufficiency.  Those are Socialism, Liberalism and Global Capitalism.  Both Socialism and Global Capitalism make man depended on others for their basic needs.  And, along with Liberalism, the three say that man is incapable of fending for themselves.

In the case of Socialism, man is dependant of the state, either through the welfare system or through employment by the state.  And, in the most extreme cases like Marxist Socialism, they are dependant on the State for even the most basic needs. In the case of Global Capitalism, the dependency, except for welfare, are exactly the same except that the “corporation” replaces the role of the provider for everything.  Essentially, in both cases, man becomes a slave either of the state or corporations and undermines man’s basic ability to fend for himself in a crisis.  Couple that with the overregulation that is forced on man by Socialism and Liberalism, it even make it more difficult for man to be self-sufficient.

There are many things we can do to break the vice-grip they have on everyone’s lives.  The first thing is to learn to grow and/or raise your own food and make things that you buy in store.  A small to medium sized garden can provide you enough vegetables that, if stored properly, can provide a family with much of their needs for the whole year.  Add to that, if you have the space and constitution, raising animals like chickens, pigs, goats, can provide additional food like eggs, milk and meat.  In addition, for what you cannot grow or raise yourselves, there are many alternatives to the grocery store or those mega stores that will remain unnamed.  Food co-ops, farmer’s markets, and even going to individual farms for basic needs are all possible.

A second way is to learn to make some things that you currently buy in the store or hire others to do.  If one learns the basics of making certain items that they use a lot.  For example, if one knows basic carpentering, electrical, and/or plumbing skills, they can do about 90% (if not more) of the repairs around the house.  Yes, you will have to buy supplies, have to always pay someone to do it.

A third way is to find a way of earning a living without relying on the government or corporation.  This is one of the basic tenets of distributism.  That is, moving the production power from the big “global” corporations to the local and/or family level.

Finally, there is the subject of the overregulation that hampers the ability of man to even consider being self-sufficient.  This is probably the toughest hurdle to get over.  There must be a grass-roots organizational effort to get people elected, starting at the local level and working up to the federal level that will work to free people from the chains of overregulation.   By breaking these chains, ma will be better able to survive.

Man will never be completely self-sufficient.  Like I said in the beginning, man is, by nature, a social creature and there will be some goods that it does not make sense to try to do your self.  Relying on completely on others is not being social.  It is being a slave.  Government and corporation cannot, and must not, be sole providers of all of man’s needs.

Even in the case of “welfare”, it has not been until recent times that this has become a role of government.  In the past, it was charity provided by individuals or by charitable organizations of one sort or another.  This also must be taken away from the government and returned to its proper place.

The way society is structured now; it cannot survive due to the onerous weight placed on it by the plagues of Socialism, Global Capitalism, and Liberalism and will implode.  We must eradicate them as much as possible and return to a place where man can survive on their own as much as possible and be able to do that.

Again I am going to bring up this issue that I have brought up previously in “Why do we Procrastinate?”  In that post, I asked the question, why to we talk and not act?  Some of the possible answers I posed were:

• Is it the fear of the unknown?
• Uncertainty of the chance of success?
• Or, is it something else?

I have come to the conclusion that it may be partially something else and some will not like what I think it is.  That conclusion is that there are “wolves in sheep’s clothing” in the movement.  That is, those who do not want to see the movement succeed.

Although they are at both sides of the spectrum, the main group is on the liberal or left side of the spectrum.  I have encountered these on one particular forum that are do vehemently on the liberal side that they refuse to recognize the Socialist threat of the left to freedoms that are essential for the success of a Distributist society.  In fact, they are so openly hostile that they attack those who dare express the idea that “socialism” is even the remotest threat and refer to the socialists as other things like corporatists.  I believe they are purposely trying to derail the movement to allow for certain forms of socialism to become prominent like it was in the previous century.

But, again I digress from the purpose of this entry.  The issue is that we are still talking and not acting.   I know of a growing body of people that are getting fed up with just talking.  However, what to do is still an issue.

I see the current economic “crisis” as a prime opportunity for organizing communities on the bases of Distributive principles that are firmly ensconced in Catholic Moral and Social teachings.  We hear about who towns (mostly small towns, but whole sections of larger towns and cities) going under due to the Global Capitalists putting the “local mill” or “local retailer” out if business.  With this parasitic leaching, many are abandoning the sections (as in the case of larger towns and cities) or even whole towns (in the case of smaller towns).

Of we can get a large enough group of dedicated and (not /or) skilled (and non-skilled who are willing to learn) people to amass in one or more of these towns, I believe we can revive them to be viable and vibrant areas again.

Now, when I talk about skilled, I am not talking about just “artisans” (although they do fulfill a need) that make certain type of crafts you see at faire and “tourist type” settings.  I am talking about builders, farmers, butchers, electricians, carpenters, and manufacturers of all types of goods and services.   With a varied pool of people, the less (with the ultimate goal of complete independence) we would have to rely on the Global Capitalists and the Socialist state for survival.  In fact, we can and must get to the point were we are providing to others and setting the example for the whole world to see.

One issue is to find the appropriate area(s) that people are willing to leave everything and move to.  There are people like me, who prefer the cooler climates (like here in Michigan) and would not like to move south.  Likewise, there are some who prefer the warmer climates.  But this is minor compared to the fact that any area chosen must have capability to become viable again.  Being in the middle of nowhere (like the ghost towns of the southwest United States) are not even remotely likely to be candidates.  The area must not only have the infrastructure to sustain a population, but also have the natural resources (i.e. water, fertile soil, and climate) to support such a population.

The time for the theoretical is over.  We must move to the practical.  We must find those who are willing and able to do and that will be the hardest part.

It seems people are always talking about a second career either to supplement their, current earnings, something to do after they retire, or completely change their career completely.  That includes me.

Over the years, I have explored various ideas for a new career since the one I am in is very stressful and you need to be constantly learning to keep up.  The various careers I have explored have ranged from a religious vocation to astrophysics.

Currently, I am exploring something for the second option for when I retire.  That is to somehow combine teaching Catholic Theology (mainly Moral and Social teachings) with practical applications to everyday life.  This has gotten me into exploring getting advanced degrees in both Catholic Theology and something like Economics.  This I have discussed in the recent blog entry: “Adjusting Life to Better Serve God.”

However, this is not the only career I have exploring.   Being of a distributist mindset, I have been exploring other things ranging from farming to running a book/music store or an inn/hotel.  Yes, they seem to be very diverse, but they can be done as a small business.  In doing so, I would be applying the principles from Distribution, and maybe the Catholic Land Movement in a practical way.

However, doing these, I would want to as part of a group who want to implement a Distributist community that, although not completely separate from society, would want to be as self contained and independent as possible.  That is to be set up as a model for society to follow.  This community would also be based on restoring the moral and social foundations based on Catholic Moral and Social teachings that have been gradually crumbling of the past couple of centuries, and accelerating as of late, since the Protestant Revolt.

The thing is getting a large enough group of like-minded people together to do such and endeavor.   I know only a handful of people that could be interested and some of those are too far to the “progressive” side of the spectrum that they may not be suited.  We would need a diverse set of skills and dedication to make this really success.

Hopefully, we who do espouse the true Distributive economic model can promote our ideas to get enough people to really make this succeed.

One of the advantages of where I live is that we have not one, but two Catholic Radio stations.  One of them, Ave Maria Radio, produces a number of programs that are heard nationally on EWTN Radio.  However, I work or am busy with other obligations when many of the shows are on during the week.  Fortunately, one of the shows, Kresta in the Afternoon, rebroadcasts some of his shows on the weekends.

I heard one such broadcast today and the person, Dr. Edward Sri, was discussing his new book, The Bible Compass: A Catholic’s Guide to Navigating the Scriptures, which is to be published next month.  The book was not of interest to me, it was his life story.  Like myself, he was (I still am) out in the business world for a number of years before he went back to study theology and started teaching and writing (his book is on my “to buy” list).

This is something that I have been thinking of doing in some capacity for a number of years.  Being single, and having no desire to get married, the options for me are much broader than for him.  I have contemplated everything from the Priesthood (Religious Order mainly), to the Diaconate, to teaching and/or writing.  I have ruled out the first two for a number of reasons, but am still thinking of the third option.

On teaching and/or writing, I would love to get a degree in Theology concentrating in Moral Theology and Catholic Social Teachings.  I feel that is where there is a void, especially on the laity side, in the teaching ranks today and it is an area that I am very interested.  However, my desired goal is not to stop there and just teach Moral Theology and/or Catholic Social Teaching.  I would love to apply that to some aspect of life.   This is where my second area of interest would come in.

As you can probably tell from other entries on my blog, I am interested in three Catholic movements: Catholic Workers Movement, Catholic Land Movement, and Distributism.  It is these three that I think I can combine with the Catholic Moral and Social teaching to create a framework to apply them to aspects of everyday life.  I already have a business degree in Computers with a minor in Finance.  However, to apply it the way I want to, I have a feeling I would need to look into one other area of business and that is Economics.

With a greater knowledge of Economics, I could really apply the Catholic Social and Moral teaching to develop and or enhance the Catholic movements mentioned above.  This is especially true for Distributism.  Up to now, Distributism has been mainly, with a few minor practical applications, a theoretical economic mode.  With knowledge of both Economics and Catholic Theology, I would be better able to combine the both into a practical and coherent economic model that could be more readily implemented.

I will be studying my options in both in the next couple of months.  I know I can get both at the Masters level where I now live.  Beyond that, I may have to explore outside the area for, at least, one of the degrees.  At this point, I have no desire to move out of this area, but that is far enough down the line that I do not have to consider that at this time.

This path that I have set for myself is challenging.  The thing is, can I balance work, school and other activity without burning out or going crazy.  That is another thing I will need to consider as I go along.

In discussing Healthcare in a forum I belong to, the subject of cooperatives (or co-ops) came up as a possible alternative to the proposed government, or socialized, solution.  This has gotten me to wonder if co-ops may be part of the solution to the development, implementation, and success of a Distributist type economic model.

For those who are unfamiliar with cooperatives, they are:

An autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned and democratically-controlled enterprise. It is a business organization owned and operated by a group of individuals for their mutual benefit.

A couple of the more familiar types of cooperatives are credit unions and agricultural co-ops.

Now I know that under some types of co-op systems, one is not independent but worker-owners of the cooperative.  The best  known example of this type of cooperative is the Mondragón Cooperative Corporation.

This, however, is not the type of cooperative that I am looking at.   The Utility cooperatives, Agricultural cooperatives, Cooperative banking, and Business and employment co-operative can best describe the types of cooperatives I am looking at.  In these types of cooperatives, individuals pull their resources to either provide goods or services to the members (i.e. energy or banking) or allow individual business to group together to market their goods and obtain raw materials needed at better prices that they would of gotten by working independently.  In addition, these type of cooperatives can also supply new and/or start-up businesses with needed capital and resources.  In the case of the latter, they could be considered associations as well as cooperatives.

What I am saying is co-operatives would allow like minded people to come together, pool their resources, and gain a level of buying and/or selling power while essentially keeping their independence in true Distributist fashion.  Essentially, gaining the power of larger businesses while staying as small or family businesses.

Yes, I know it is a weird question but, I am thinking if really does.

It has been said (and from the evidence I have gathered), that Socialism (especially in it most extreme forms of Marxist, Fascist, and Nazi forms) stifles innovation and creativity. There is essentially no incentive to be creative since the person is, in varying degrees, property of the state thus their ideas are property of the state. Yes, the state can reward those who do show some creativity with “perks”, but the true satisfaction is not really there. This is especially true in the former, and current, Marxist states where they have trouble with innovation and usually have to procure any ideas from others (theft and spying).

The same could be said for Global Capitalism. Even though people are not “property” of the of the company, in many cases, their ideas are even if they think of them on their own time. Yes, the company can provide the same type of “rewards” as the Socialist state does for those who show some creativity that provides revenue to the company however, just like the Socialist state, the satisfaction is not there either.

This lack on creativity and innovation can be seen in the products Global Capitalism produced. Their “cookie cutter” mindset makes many of the products look the same no matter who produces it. Cars, trucks, and SUV’s, with minor variances, look essentially alike. And, it does not stop there. Everything is “standardized” from the homes of the major builders down to the processed food we buy.

Heck, the lack of innovation and creativity has even crept into entertainment that is essentially controlled by big production companies like Sony and Disney. Why do you think so many remakes of old films and movie series are made? They cannot think of new ideas.

To see real creativity and innovation you have to look at those who do not fall into slaves of the state or wage slaves of the corporation. Whether it be the independent architect in the case of homes down to the independent filmmaker, the products, when you get outside the large corporation, are much more defined and refined than those from the corporation. The reason? Satisfaction in what they create and produce.

It behooves ourselves to move away from the “cookie cutter” and “mass produced” mentality to look at and but products from alternative sources in order to keep innovation and creativity alive.

It also fits in with the philosophy of those of us who believes a Distributist economy/society is essential for the redemption of society and to ensure it does not implode from the plagues of Socialism, Global Capitalism, Materialism, Liberalism, and Relativism.

For too long, we who subscribe to the concepts of Distributism based on Catholic Social and Moral teachings have sat idly by while the powerbase of the Global Capitalists and Socialists have grown by leaps and bounds until we are at a point where the two have merged in an incestuous relationship with each other.

Individuals are now, for the most part, slaves of either the state or large corporations for their livelihood.  The sheer power over production by the Global Capitalist and the out of control regulatory state of Socialism have made it practically impossible for individuals to be free of either and be able to survive.

We must start fighting and put into practice what we subscribe to even it means separating our selves from the mainstream economy.  Of course, separating ourselves may not be a bad thing since both Global Capitalism and Socialism are plagues on society just like their siblings plagues Relativism, Liberalism, and Socialism.  A little “white market” competition to the current “black market” systems would be a good thing.  Yes, I am calling Global Capitalism and Socialism “black market systems because of the immorality that is interwoven into both.

This, however, does not mean cutting ourselves off from society.  We must interact with the Capitalist and Socialist heathens to bring them back into a moral and just system.   The more we can bring over to our way of thinking economically, morally, and socially the better it will be for society and may actually prevent the impending implosion of society as a whole from the aforementioned plagues.

In reading An Essay on the Restoration of Property by Hillarie Belloc, I have come across some of his ideas that need to be considered on how we can break the grip of Global Capitalism.  Now, in his day, it was not called “Global Capitalism”.  That is a more current phenomenon.  He called in “large units” or “economic unit” since, at the time of this work; most companies were still relegated to country boundaries.  He goes on to describe two types of “economic units” as “necessarily large” and what I would define as “developed”.

In dealing with these “economic units”, he proposed a four-fold approach:

1. In the case of the “necessarily large”, “we must watch every opportunity of substituting the smaller unit for the larger whenever a new discovery permits this; but where there is no such opportunity, where large unit is inevitable, we must control either for the purpose of creating well-distributed property thereof, or for the purpose of managing the use as a communal concern”.  (pg. 66)
2. “Where amalgamation and the formation of large units is due not to the nature of instrument but to unchecked competition, we must deliberately reverse the process, as in the case of shopkeepers and craftsman.” (pg. 67)
3. “In all cases where separately owned shares in the unit are possible (and that is nearly always possible) we should aim at creating the largest possible number of shareholders and at preventing the growth of large blocks of shares under the one control.” (pg. 66)
4. “We should especially act against that typical modern evil which may be called ‘irresponsible control,” whereby the economic unit is manages without real responsibility to the shareholders, and even without the real possession  by those who control them.” (pg. 66)

He then goes on to describe each in detail and possible solutions to each including taxation on larger and “with the revenue subsidizing the smaller one”, stock distribution to individual or small groups and make it hard for large groups to be formed (again, it seems through penalties and taxation), and the physical breakup of the large into smaller units.  Of these, I really only completely support the breakup option and, partially, the other solutions if they can be accomplished by methods that do not involve progressive type taxation (there are some taxation that could be used, but that is for another posting).

In looking at these four categories, number one is now a rarity today where it cannot be broken up.  The other three exist  (especially number two) in various forms in the public sector.  Again, we are taking about large companies national, and now global, companies.  We are not necessarily talking about small local companies.

The goal is to divide the base into small units that can be managed at the regional or, preferably, the local (and even family) level.  We must break the power that Global Capitalism has on the populace.

In reading books on the Catholic Land Movement, I have come to the realization that man may not be meant to live in an urban, or even suburban, setting.   In fact, for most of human history, man did not live in large cities or the sprawl that now surrounds them.  It has only really been since the Industrial Revolution, and accelerated after World War I, that a significant proportion of man has migrated toward and lived in large urban settings.  Just since 1900, the percentage of people living in urban areas of the United States has grown from 39.6 to 79.2 in 2000.

Man is a social creature, but urban living does not foster this in a positive way.  Instead of the family being the main social unit (and the Church, most likely, the second), it has been replaced with the workplace, bars, and other institutions that are the antithesis of the family and Church.  Instead of fostering social behavior, it actually promoted isolation in many instances due to the fact that these are not really social interaction as it is meant to be.  This isolationism, in my opinion, is most likely the main factor in the breakup of the family and the increase in anti-social behavior like criminal activity, drug use, and alcoholism.

There are other factors to consider too other than the social interaction like work satisfaction.  I am hoping to discuss this as I get more information on this.

What to do about it is up for discussion.  Not all are suited for the farm. However, I do not believe man can continue to live this way for much longer.   The urbanization of mankind is a blight that must be dealt with.

As for me, I am seriously looking at how I can escape this urban prison.