User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Subsidiarity

  1. #11
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,717, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416530
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,717
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,302
    Thanked 53,475x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Localism, to me, mainly deals with redistributing political authority. If one sees capitalism as a parallel or collusive authority or even an authority that subsumes politics, then I think a solution similar to subsidiarity is the distributism of Belloc and Chesterton, that is, to retain private property but distribute the means of production into as many hands as possible, i short, decentralize capitalism.
    I think that's about right. Localism is more of a strictly political idea whereas Subsidiarity and Distributism encompass a wider array of social relations.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Mister D For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (07-03-2018)

  3. #12
    Points: 665,345, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 85.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433322
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,560
    Points
    665,345
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,988
    Thanked 80,911x in 54,724 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    I think that's about right. Localism is more of a strictly political idea whereas Subsidiarity and Distributism encompass a wider array of social relations.
    Certainly, the latter two are concerned for more than mere material value. Localism, following Nisbit anyhow, is as well.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  4. #13
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    Sure! What I'm getting at is that in the past individuals had little to no direct contact with the state. The state, as it were, was relatively remote. Parishes, professional organizations (e.g. guilds), your town, hamlet etc. represented you. The state dealt with corporate bodies not with the individuals they were comprised of. Don't mistake this for progressive collectivism. These were organic social bodies that individuals participated in and derived their rights, privileges and even their identity from. They played a central role in peoples everyday lives from regulating prices and hours of work to what we now call welfare. Over the centuries these institutions were gradually (and purposely) destroyed. The state now plays an administrative and managerial it did not play in the past. Individuals now rely directly on the state bureaucracy for virtually everything.
    That I understood. Thank you.

    Modern economies probably thwart that. My thinking is local influences state and state influences federal. On the local level I think neighborhoods would be the influence on local authority. If my neighbors want something we could all go over to our councilman; we could also send one person with our blessing and a threat.

    I'm thinking that local officials should "elect" whatever state officials we might need. the way they vote will decide their futures. I'd like to see the states decide the federal government in the same way. I think my influence would be greater that way.

    On the local level it can be neighborhoods but also any group that is interested in a town or rural area. I;m thinking of the Grange, the BBB, the unions, the charities, etc. It sounds like a mish-mash and it may be.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Captdon For This Useful Post:

    Chris (07-03-2018),Mister D (07-03-2018)

  6. #14
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,717, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416530
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,717
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,302
    Thanked 53,475x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Captdon View Post
    That I understood. Thank you.

    Modern economies probably thwart that. My thinking is local influences state and state influences federal. On the local level I think neighborhoods would be the influence on local authority. If my neighbors want something we could all go over to our councilman; we could also send one person with our blessing and a threat.

    I'm thinking that local officials should "elect" whatever state officials we might need. the way they vote will decide their futures. I'd like to see the states decide the federal government in the same way. I think my influence would be greater that way.

    On the local level it can be neighborhoods but also any group that is interested in a town or rural area. I;m thinking of the Grange, the BBB, the unions, the charities, etc. It sounds like a mish-mash and it may be.
    The Grange was a Midwest agricultural movement after the Civil War, correct? I want to see if I know my stuff without looking it up.

    When you say modern conditions probably thwart that I agree to an extent. Technological and economic conditions have changed. but, for me, while Subsidiarity and Distributism are certainly dated they represent nods to the past. They're models of how we should be thinking. We don't have to surrender to anonymity, bloated bureaucracies or a society of strangers. We can participate fully in our civic life and control our own destinies as peoples and communities. What we need desperately now is what we would call a "paradigm shift" but the vast majority of people I encounter on forums simply can't conceive of living in a significantly different way then we are now. Sadly, I think this is in part due to our obsession with individual rights. We're very jealous of those rights and they often come at the expense of living together but that's another topic.

    I think you articulated this well enough. I sympathize.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Mister D For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (07-04-2018)

  8. #15
    Points: 665,345, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 85.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433322
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,560
    Points
    665,345
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,988
    Thanked 80,911x in 54,724 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    A number of advantages accrue from this sort of social organization.

    One that should be obvious is it gets more people involved in the polity. I stopped voting in part because at the federal level where so much attention is focused my vote counts for little. Society organized at the neighborhood level on up would mean I have a voice and could make a difference. Also, it gets around the problem of rational ignorance. The knowledge that would matter would be first and foremost at the local level. You know what you value and what those around you value because you talk to them, interact with them.

    Another advantage, for similar reasons, would be the development, once again, of community and culture tied to a place. Each community would develop itself and its customs and traditions to pass on to following generations.

    Yet another advantage is this social organization would embody the intent of federalism, perhaps even close to the original Articles. Each neighborhood, community, area on up--if not each grouping by grange, union, charity, church, club, etc, on up--would influence if not control the next level up, perhaps by frequent elections keeping representatives in office or removing them if they didn't live up to local expectations.

    That would lead to each locality experimenting with different form or organization, different rules and in time seeing what worked better for others to emulate or adapt to their locality. One would then be free to vote by foot, moving away from a community you didn't value to one you did.

    I'm sure there are more advantages.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (07-04-2018),Mister D (07-03-2018)

  10. #16
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,717, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416530
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,717
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,302
    Thanked 53,475x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    A number of advantages accrue from this sort of social organization.

    One that should be obvious is it gets more people involved in the polity. I stopped voting in part because at the federal level where so much attention is focused my vote counts for little. Society organized at the neighborhood level on up would mean I have a voice and could make a difference. Also, it gets around the problem of rational ignorance. The knowledge that would matter would be first and foremost at the local level. You know what you value and what those around you value because you talk to them, interact with them.

    Another advantage, for similar reasons, would be the development, once again, of community and culture tied to a place. Each community would develop itself and its customs and traditions to pass on to following generations.

    Yet another advantage is this social organization would embody the intent of federalism, perhaps even close to the original Articles. Each neighborhood, community, area on up--if not each grouping by grange, union, charity, church, club, etc, on up--would influence if not control the next level up, perhaps by frequent elections keeping representatives in office or removing them if they didn't live up to local expectations.

    That would lead to each locality experimenting with different form or organization, different rules and in time seeing what worked better for others to emulate or adapt to their locality. One would then be free to vote by foot, moving away from a community you didn't value to one you did.
    I'm sure there are more advantages.
    Agreed on all points. Any democracy worthy of the name should encourage participation to the greatest extent possible. This is best facilitated at the local level.

    Except I would say your votes in federal elections are virtually meaningless.

    I must also confess that I am becoming much more attracted to the concept of community or corporate rights.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Mister D For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (07-04-2018)

  12. #17
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    The Grange was a Midwest agricultural movement after the Civil War, correct? I want to see if I know my stuff without looking it up.

    When you say modern conditions probably thwart that I agree to an extent. Technological and economic conditions have changed. but, for me, while Subsidiarity and Distributism are certainly dated they represent nods to the past. They're models of how we should be thinking. We don't have to surrender to anonymity, bloated bureaucracies or a society of strangers. We can participate fully in our civic life and control our own destinies as peoples and communities. What we need desperately now is what we would call a "paradigm shift" but the vast majority of people I encounter on forums simply can't conceive of living in a significantly different way then we are now. Sadly, I think this is in part due to our obsession with individual rights. We're very jealous of those rights and they often come at the expense of living together but that's another topic.

    I think you articulated this well enough. I sympathize.
    Yea, it was after the War. It's all over the place now.

    I really want as local a control as possible. We have become too "big thinking." There was no reason for it except people losing track of what was happening.

    I love individual rights but there should be community rights. i don't see any contradicition in this. I don't see how my individual right are impacted.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  13. #18
    Points: 665,345, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 85.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433322
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,560
    Points
    665,345
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,988
    Thanked 80,911x in 54,724 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    Agreed on all points. Any democracy worthy of the name should encourage participation to the greatest extent possible. This is best facilitated at the local level.

    Except I would say your votes in federal elections are virtually meaningless.

    I must also confess that I am becoming much more attracted to the concept of community or corporate rights.

    A good reason to drastically limit federal powers.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  14. #19
    Points: 665,345, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 85.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433322
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,560
    Points
    665,345
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,988
    Thanked 80,911x in 54,724 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Captdon View Post
    Yea, it was after the War. It's all over the place now.

    I really want as local a control as possible. We have become too "big thinking." There was no reason for it except people losing track of what was happening.

    I love individual rights but there should be community rights. i don't see any contradicition in this. I don't see how my individual right are impacted.

    It could be said your community defines you rather than you or the collection of indivuduals it.

    Even the Declaration and the BoR still speak of the rights of the people. They're your rights because you're a part of the people.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts