Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Distributism Is the Future (That Few People Want)
Distributism Is the Future (That Few People Want)
Apr 4, 2025 5:07 AM

Over the years, many of us here at Acton have been engaged in long-running(and mostly congenial) feud with distributists.

Family squabbles can often be the most heated, and that is true of this rivalry between the Christianchampions of distributism and the Christian champions of free markets here at the Acton Institute. We fight among ourselves because we have an awful lot mon.

For example, we share the afocus on encouraging subsidiarity, self-sufficiency, and entrepreneurship. We also share arespect for rule of law, private property, and the essential nature of the family. The key difference — at least as viewed from this side of the feud —can be summed up in one word: distributism is mostly unrealistic.

That’s a long-standing critique, but it’s also one that may bechanging. Not that distributistsare necessarily ing more realistic (I don’t know that they are) but merely that some of the most forward-thinking of the neo-distributists (the neo-neo-distributists?) are adopting a more realistic form of unrealistic aspirations.

To see what I mean, consider the old school neo-distributist model for how the system could work in the real world: the Mondragon Corporation. The only example these type of neo-distributists ever give — and good grief, they refer to it ad nauseam – is the Mondragon Corporation, a Spanish worker cooperative federation. The problem with using the Mondragon Corporation as a model of distributism is that it does not fit the basic definition of a distributist firm.

For starters, it’s hard to see how such as pany fits the ideal of “localism.” Mondragon has over 70,000 employees in panies and annual revenues of more than 13 billion. The idea that individual workers are “owners” is a myth that even their employees don’t consider real. A third of pany’s employees are not even members of the collective. And surveys have shown that relatively few workers in Mondragon firms consider themselves to be “owners” of pany. Most seem to agree withone worker who said, “I am the owner of my job. The only property I have is my job.” If the only “property” you own is your job, then you do not own property. You don’t even own your job as much as your job ownsyou.

Multi-billion dollar globalist collectives owned by two-thirds of the employees is not a practical modelfor changing America’s economic system. What is needed is more small-scale practical changes — andany of the more realistic of the neo-distributists have begun to recognize this reality. In a recent debate sponsored by Acton, distributist Joseph Pearce said,

[I]n practical terms, every policy or every practice that leads to a reuniting of man with the land and capital on which he depends for his sustenance is a step in the right direction. Every policy or practice that puts him more at the mercy of those who control the land and the capital on which he depends, and therefore who controls his labor also, is a step in the wrong direction. Practical politics is about moving in the right direction, however slowly.

Over the past few years there has been two economic shifts toward practices that reunite “man with the land and capital on which he depends for his sustenance.” They are the “gig economy” and the“sharing economy.”

Gene Callahan recognizes this shift in a smart essay in The American Conservative titled “Distributism is the Future.” After explaining the basic theory and history of distributism, Callahan says, “Let us examine some existing instances of economic activities that are more or less distributist in character.”

His first example (of course) is Mondragon (it might now be a requirement for distributist to mention pany in every essay), though Callahan points out some of the many reasons it might not be the best model. His second example — open-source software projects — is interesting, but as he admits, suffers from the fact that most of the “workers” don’t actually make any money.

His third example is the most intriguing of all:

munications revolution has made distributism more feasible in other ways as well. What is called the “sharing economy” has been a hot subject in the news, and in city councils, panies like Airbnb and Uber have cut into the business of traditional hotels and taxi services, respectively. panies can be characterized, to some extent, as distributist enterprises.

Airbnb, by allowing homeowners to treat their property as small hotels, turns ordinary homes into capital goods, something of which Chesterton and Belloc would have approved. Uber does the same with people’s automobiles.

I can picture the Wendell Berry-type distributists spewing their locally-grown coffee all over puter screens after reading Uber and Airbnb are models of distributism. But I think Callahan is mostly correct. The sharing economy is likely to be the most realistic form of distributism we will see in our lifetimes.

And that’s bad news for distributism.

G.K. Chesterton, one of the founding fathers of distributism, quipped that, “The problem with capitalism is not too many capitalists, but not enough capitalists.” If that is a problem for capitalism, it is the fatal blow to distributism. The single biggest reason why distributism has not yet, nor ever will, e a mainstream “third way” is because relatively few people want to rely on their own private property to provide their e. Few people have the capacity, much less the willingness, to be self-sufficient capitalists in the mode that true distributism requires.

Yesterday, the Boston Globe Magazine ran an article with a headline that summarizes the problem: “The gig economy ing. You probably won’t like it.”

According to a 2014 missioned by the Freelancers Union, 53 million Americans are independent workers, about 34 percent of the total workforce. A study from Intuit predicts that by 2020, 40 percent of US workers will fall into this category.

While there is considerable disagreement over this projection, what is clear is that “more and more jobs are being moved to independent contractor status,” says Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford University. Pfeffer cites a recent paper that found that “the percentage of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements rose from 10.1 percent in February 2005 to 15.8 percent in late 2015.” This rise accounts for over 9 million people — more than all of the net employment growth in the US economy over that decade.

I’m one of those 9 million. For the past five years, I’ve been an independent laborer who works from home. All of the products and services I provide (blog posts, editing, etc.) are produced with material goods that I own (a laptop, etc.). I’ve been living the distributist dream.I can also attest that this distributist ideal is is hard. Very, very hard.

I don’t have employee benefits (I pay for health insurance out of my own pocket) or take vacations (my last vacation was in 2008) and I have to pay all of my own payroll taxes (if you work for someone else take what your payroll taxes and double them — that’s what I pay). I also work many more hours than would a person who has a nine-to-five corporate job.

And yet . . . I wouldn’t change a thing. For me, this type of situation is the best option available. But it’s not for everyone. Indeed, it’s not for most people.

Most workers want security. They want limited responsibility. They want to sell their labor on the open market and collect a paycheck. They don’t want the extra layer of having bine their labor with some tangible “capital goods” in order to make a living. They want to work for someone else, have someone else give them pay and benefits, and leave the worries to someone else.

Like the distributists, I wish the world were full of entrepreneurs who were more willing and able to make a living solely through their own capital and labor. Unfortunately, we don’t live in such a world. And if this is the vision distributist’s vision for the future, it’s a vision of a future that most people don’t want.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Which Metro Areas Have the Most/Least Economic Freedom?
The wide differences in economic freedom that we observe at the country level can exist at the subnational level as too (e.g., residents in Texas and Florida have greater economic freedom than those in California and New York). But until recently, there were no local parable to the national and global rankings. In a recently published study for the Journal of Regional Analysis & Policy, Dean Stansel, professor of economics at Florida Gulf Coast University, shows that greater economic freedom...
Immigration: Amnesty and the Rule of Law
It is a moral right of man to work. Pursuing a vocation not only allows an individual to provide for himself or his family, it also brings human dignity to the individual. Each person was created with unique talents, and the provision of an environment in which he can use those gifts is paramount. As C. Neal Johnson, business professor at Hope International University and proponent of “Business as Mission,” says, “God is an incredibly creative individual, and He said...
Should Christians Be Worried About Government Surveillance?
Ed Stetzter thinks so. In a Christianity Today article, Stetzer says our fundamental rights – rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights – are getting abused. He says alarm bells should be sounding among Christians, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Our Founding Fathers saw the Bill of Rights as providing barriers against government overreach and abuse. People (particularly people in governments with power) could not be trusted to have no checks on their power. Why? Well, some...
Value Creation for the Glory of God
The real estate crisis led to plenty of finger-pointing and blame-shifting, but for Phoenix real estate developer Walter Crutchfield, it led to self-examination and spiritual reflection. “The real estate crash brought me to a place of stepping back and evaluating,” Crutchfield says. “I could see where I lost sight of the individual intrinsic value of work, of individuals, munity…Rather than asking ‘is the demand reasonable?,’ we just serviced it, and now we had a chance to think about what we...
Work and the Political Economy of the Zombie Apocalypse
“Mmm…neoliberalism.” One of the more curious cultural movements in recent years has been the increasing interest in zombies, and in particular the dystopian visions of a world following the zombie apocalypse. Part of the fascination has to do, I think, with the value of thought experiments in speculation about such futures, however improbable. There may be something to be learned from gazing into a sort of fun house mirror, the distorted image of humanity as seen in zombies. But zombies...
Federal Data Hub: Say Good-Bye To Your Privacy
Undoubtedly, we live in an era where personal privacy is difficult to maintain. Even if you choose not to have a Facebook account or Tweet madly, you still know that your medical records are on-line somewhere, that your bank account is only a hack away from being emptied, and that cell phone records are now apparently government domain. But it gets worse. Enter the Federal Data Hub, which will give the government access to “reams of personal piled by federal...
If You Live Here, You’ll Never Amount To Anything
A study out of Harvard University focusing on tax credits and other tax expenditures has caused 24/7 Wall St. to declare that America has 10 cities where the poor just can’t get rich. Among the reasons that economic upward mobility is so minimal in these cities: horrible public education (leading to high dropout rates) and being raised in single-mother households. What these cities share is an economic segregation: two distinct classes of people, with virtually nothing mon. However, it seems...
For Europe’s Youth, an Attitude Adjustment is Required
Humility is probably one of the most difficult human virtues to achieve. For me, as a Hungarian intern at the Acton Institute, listening to Samuel Gregg’s June lecture in Grand Rapids on his new book, ing Europe about the Old Continent’s crisis is instructive. Relations between the United States and major European powers have been testy from time to time, of course, but Europe seems to lack self-criticism. Aging Europe, an unsustainable social model, a two-speed Europe: these are some...
Why social mobility matters—and income inequality does not
When es to household e, progressives tend to start with their intuitive understanding of fairness (i.e., some people have a lot more e than others), move to the solution (redistribution of e and wealth from those who have more to those who have less), and only then to develop a metric that justifies implementing their solution: e inequality. Because of this roundabout approach, you rarely hear progressives argue that e inequality is a problem since for them it just is...
What is Religious Freedom?
In its fullest and most robust sense, religion is the human person’s being in right relation to the divine, says Robert George, and all of us have a duty, in conscience, to seek the truth and to honor the freedom of all men and women everywhere to do the same: . . . the existential raising of religious questions, the honest identification of answers, and the fulfilling of what one sincerely believes to be one’s duties in the light of...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved