Dorothy Day - Catholic Marxist?

[aztecklaw]

Back when I used to be a practicing Catholic, I used to study Christian history. Reading about Dorothy Day was pretty much my first run in with socialism.

One of the things that caused me to break away from my Catholic faith was its apparent support for capitalism. Seeing how capitalism affected the Americas and the indigenous people in a very negative way, I was left very confused.

When you read the Bible, you see how the Bible is the advocate for the poor and the common everyday worker. It would seem to me Christianity would better fit in with socialism than any other ideal. For me, I pretty much thought Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin 'got it right' when it came to the ideal Catholic society.

Here's some links about Dorothy Day:

http://palefire.typepad.com/justice/

http://www.catholicworker.org/

Or simply google their names or the Catholic Worker Movement and you will find a wealth of information.

Now seeing how I'm new to the idea of socialism, I wanted to ask if indeed Dorothy Day advocated for socialism. Were her ideals taken from socialism or did she simply use some of the ideas from socialism to create their own brand of social order?

Would I be wrong to assume that socialism would be a better fit for the 'bare bones' Christian? Sorry if you don't know what I mean, sometimes I have trouble expressing myself... If you took away all political climate and just started a community with Christian ideals on a 'naked world' would it result in a society of socialism? Or do I not understand socialism?

Anyways, I probably don't make sense , but if anyone thinks they understand my jibberish and wants to take a stab at it, it would be appreciated.

[Severian]

Socialist, probably, in the sense of social-democratic...not Marxist.

[SonofRage]

Catholic Worker is Anarchist

[aztecklaw]

Originally posted by SonofRage@Mar 29 2005, 01:30 AM
Catholic Worker is Anarchist

Now that's interesting. Anarchist huh?

What are the elements in the Catholic Worker that lead you to conclude that it is an Anarchist movement. What is it about the Catholic Worker that I'm missing that points towards Anarchist?

[MKS]

Catholism is a perversion of Christianity. Created and subsatnied to support the rich kingdoms of Europe.

I too used to be Catholic (I went to Seminary for 1year) and further studying it just made me aware of the crimes of the Catholic Church.

Now I am an Athiest and a socialist.

The basic ideals of Christianity can be compared to a utopian socialism, that is an ideal of community without injustice, inequality or cruelty. However it also commands a subserviance to a divine power, which because it cannot manifest itself, is consolidated by men (i.e. Priests, bishops etc.)

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" Karl Marx.
Religion allows oppression and corruption.

To answer you original question. Dorthy Day and the Catholic worker was established to protect the low income Catholic working families and to advocate for fair labour practices and against discrimination. Maybe her ideas were socialist in essence, but her ties to the Catholic Church cancel that out.

[SonofRage]

Well, I know people from Catholic Worker (and I was in jail with a few of them on March 19th) but it's not hard to tell if you look at these two points from their "Aims & Means":

--In economics, private and state capitalism bring about an unjust distribution of wealth, for the profit motive guides decisions. Those in power live off the sweat of others' brows, while those without power are robbed of a just return for their work. Usury (the charging of interest above administrative costs) is a major contributor to the wrongdoing intrinsic to this system. We note, especially, how the world debt crisis leads poor countries into greater deprivation and a dependency from which there is no foreseeable escape. Here at home, the number of hungry and homeless and unemployed people rises in the midst of increasing affluence.

--In politics, the state functions to control and regulate life. Its power has burgeoned hand in hand with growth in technology, so that military, scientific and corporate interests get the highest priority when concrete political policies are formulated. Because of the sheer size of institutions, we tend towards government by bureaucracy--that is, government by nobody. Bureaucracy, in all areas of life, is not only impersonal, but also makes accountability, and, therefore, an effective political forum for redressing grievances, next to impossible.

As you can see, they are Anti-Capitalist and Anti-State.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I'm not sure what there is to miss - they're pretty explicitly anarchist, haha.
Seriously, head over to their site, and dig some of their documents.

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by MKS@Mar 28 2005, 10:25 PM

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" Karl Marx.
Religion allows oppression and corruption.

A frequently misunderstood quote by Marx.

Here's a bit more of the text:

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of spiritless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

In Marx's day, an "opiate" was not a narcatic, it was a pain killer. He was saying that people turned to religion to ease their suffering, because they did not see an alternative. The quote isn't quite as hostile as people make it out to me.

Of course, I'm not religious at all, this was just a point of information.

[MKS]

I knew the correct interpertation of the Marx passage. It applies to todays critique of religion.

Religion has been and will always be the tool of oppresion of almost evry people in the world.

Opiate was not a pain killer, but it was a dillusitory drug that clouds reality and allows subserveance and mindless alliegance.

I recently submitted an article about religion and oppression that gives futher insight into my views about the subject.

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by MKS@Mar 28 2005, 10:54 PM


Opiate was not a pain killer, but it was a dillusitory drug that clouds reality and allows subserveance and mindless alliegance.

That's just factually wrong. In Marx's day, the usage of the term was synonymous with a pain killer.

[MKS]

It was also a narcotic (a narcotic can be a painkller) used for recreational use. You can say the same about Valium, it is a painkiller, but also a narcotic used for rec. use.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by SonofRage@Mar 28 2005, 07:30 PM
Catholic Worker is Anarchist

Catholic Anarchist!?

[STI]

Moved to Religion

[Xvall]

My main problem would be that Catholicism in general seems to be a hierarchal system in nature, and that it would conflict with the notion of stateleness.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Drake Dracoli@Mar 31 2005, 05:26 PM
My main problem would be that Catholicism in general seems to be a hierarchal system in nature, and that it would conflict with the notion of stateleness.

You mean the whole, Pope having his own state and such?
Not to mention that he is basically a dictator...

This is so absurd, it is funny

What is next? Catholics against the Pope?

[Monty Cantsin]

Haven’t you guys ever heard of Liberation theology? It’s quite prevalent in Latin America just search for it in Google… general gist is that they criticise dominate churches that uses their power to suppress the movements for social change and say they return to the early Christian vales by supporting the oppressed and using the church as an institution of social revolution.

[aztecklaw]

Originally posted by 313C7 iVi4RX+Apr 1 2005, 04:49 AM--> (313C7 iVi4RX @ Apr 1 2005, 04:49 AM)

Drake Dracoli

@Mar 31 2005, 05:26 PM
My main problem would be that Catholicism in general seems to be a hierarchal system in nature, and that it would conflict with the notion of stateleness.

You mean the whole, Pope having his own state and such?
Not to mention that he is basically a dictator...

This is so absurd, it is funny

What is next? Catholics against the Pope? [/b]

Actually, there are Catholics that believe that there was only one Pope and that there was no order or call to create a succession of Popes. I'm not pro religion by any means, but I think its useful to know that.

In all reality, about 95% of the world's population believe in God. There is no way a movement is going to be able to wipe that away. In order to persue a socialist movement, you would have to conceed that there would have to be a tolerance for religion. I don't like the idea myself, but I'm just trying to be realistic.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Monty Cantsin+--> (Monty Cantsin)Haven’t you guys ever heard of Liberation theology?[/b]

To the point of nausea. It's an oxymoron...like military music.

Understand that liberation theology does not and cannot offer anything more than a slightly more humane version of what already exists right now.

It was invented as a response to the Cuban revolution and the rise of guerrilla movements in Latin America. Its purpose was to re-capture lost market share.

It was (and still is) a cynical re-branding of a product perceived as old-fashioned and un-hip.

That product is still the same -- obedience to a gang running a godracket.

aztecklaw

In all reality, about 95% of the world's population believe in God. There is no way a movement is going to be able to wipe that away. In order to pursue a socialist movement, you would have to concede that there would have to be a tolerance for religion. I don't like the idea myself, but I'm just trying to be realistic.

No, I believe it's down to 85% and falling.

But no matter what the number is, tolerating religion in your movement is simply a form of slow suicide. Its inherent reactionary ideology will poison every hope that you had.

We may win or we may lose...but dammit let's don't beat ourselves!

[Wenty]

a contempt for toleration like this leads to general authoritarianism. I wouldn't want to live in your future.

[STI]

Sorry, RS. I just had to jump on this. I just had to.

a contempt for toleration like this leads to general authoritarianism. I wouldn't want to live in your future.

So, then, based on what you're saying, we should "tolerate" things we don't agree with, right?

Where do we draw the line?

Should fascists be tolerated? Should they be allowed in our movement?

Hell no. Why? They'd ruin it. You know that.

The exact same thing applies to religion.