The Pope Argue That Socialism Is An Unacceptable Economic System
Why does the Pope argue that socialism is an unacceptable economic system?
Pope Leo XIII argues that socialism is an unacceptable economic system simply because it does not fall within the boundaries of natural rights. The Pope starts out by saying socialism strives off of the poor man’s envy of the rich by supporting the publication of private property. Pope Leo focuses on the rights of man given to him by nature, which, he claims, one of the rights is possession of private property. Man, by his nature is the master of his own acts under the law and power of God. Man also has the right to provide substance to his own body, something he could provide for himself if he personally owned property from which to profit off of. Socialists, by removing the privacy of property, defraud man of what his labor produces by making the fruit of his labor a public object. In conclusion, civil laws are only sound when they are accurately derived from nature.
On what grounds does the Pope defend the right to private property?
The Pope defends man’s right to private property via natural law. a man works to have the right to …show more content…
The Pope parallels the argument of Ida Tarbell against Rockefeller. Rockefeller perfectly displays Socialism and all of its aspects on a smaller scale using railroads. Rockefeller became the source of power in his realm of business. With this power he was able to yield a dictatorship relationship with his rival railroad companies which were much smaller and insignificant. Though Rockefeller might not have followed a just moral law, his company grew massively and suppressed all opposition. He was able to complicate the use of the railroad system in an unfair way so that he could ultimately profit more, similar objectives to that of a Socialist economy. Ida Tarbell opposed this way of governing just as Pope Leo XIII opposed
Pope Leo XIII argues that socialism is an unacceptable economic system simply because it does not fall within the boundaries of natural rights. The Pope starts out by saying socialism strives off of the poor man’s envy of the rich by supporting the publication of private property. Pope Leo focuses on the rights of man given to him by nature, which, he claims, one of the rights is possession of private property. Man, by his nature is the master of his own acts under the law and power of God. Man also has the right to provide substance to his own body, something he could provide for himself if he personally owned property from which to profit off of. Socialists, by removing the privacy of property, defraud man of what his labor produces by making the fruit of his labor a public object. In conclusion, civil laws are only sound when they are accurately derived from nature.
On what grounds does the Pope defend the right to private property?
The Pope defends man’s right to private property via natural law. a man works to have the right to …show more content…
The Pope parallels the argument of Ida Tarbell against Rockefeller. Rockefeller perfectly displays Socialism and all of its aspects on a smaller scale using railroads. Rockefeller became the source of power in his realm of business. With this power he was able to yield a dictatorship relationship with his rival railroad companies which were much smaller and insignificant. Though Rockefeller might not have followed a just moral law, his company grew massively and suppressed all opposition. He was able to complicate the use of the railroad system in an unfair way so that he could ultimately profit more, similar objectives to that of a Socialist economy. Ida Tarbell opposed this way of governing just as Pope Leo XIII opposed