Inside the RCC there are many left-wing groups. Stuff like “liberation theology” is pretty obvious. Distributism is much more insidious, because its outward appearance is that of traditionalism, not that of left-wing subversives (still, that uniform distribution of capital thingy should’ve been a dead give-away).[1] It’s only a mask. Debunking of distributism as an economic system has already been done. What is far more interesting is the fact that distributism was, since its very inception, connected to the radical left and other dubious elements.
Chesterton and Belloc with their buddy Shaw
Let us for a moment check the people behind distributist thought. Let me point out that I’ll be generous and ignore the fact that Eric Gill was a reprobate pervert, blasphemer, and a paedophile. No, much more important is the fact that Eric Gill was a member of the Fabian society. But he wasn’t the only one, seeing how Arthur Joseph Penty too was a member of the Fabian society. Douglas Arnold Hyde was an outright Communist, editor of the Daily Worker. Then there was Dorothy Day, the “social activist”, etc. But the most interesting are the views of Hilaire Belloc (whose father was a liberal with Radical sympathies), the man who espoused supposed “genuinely right-wing” economic views. That very same, supposedly right-wing Belloc, was a great admirer of the French Revolution[2], who was “strongly attached” to Rousseau. He considered the Reign of Terror “just and honest“, and the king a traitor who needed to be executed. Though he named them Hilaire Belloc: the Liberal, Patrick Odou, the man who penned these articles, at one point wonders aloud
[…]I am a little uncertain as to whether I should keep the title of this series as ‘Hillaire Belloc: the Liberal’, or change it to ‘Hillaire Belloc: the Socialist’, or perhaps even to ‘Hillaire Belloc: the pre-Communist’.
Further reading
Economics of Catholic Subsidiarity
Catholic Social Teaching and The Market Economy
Footnotes
[1] Many traditionalist are misled about the nature of laissez-faire laissez-passer economy (which we don’t have BTW). Cultural liberalism coupled with capitalism is bad, but cultural liberalism coupled with socialism is even worse! Historically speaking, the problem with capitalism wasn’t capitalism in and of itself, but the fact that national-liberals, where they came to power, outlawed the feudal relations (like in Italy for example), traditional culture, and religious influence upon society (e.g. Kulturkampf programs in Germany), etc.
[2] Note that even liberals condemned the Revolution, and those liberals (both later and contemporary) that did not, praised in their writings only the early, pre-Jacobin stages, that was supposed to make something akin to Englad out of France (radicals everywhere universally supported the Revolution, however). Exception to this was Thomas Jefferson, who persisted in his support for the Revolution even as his friends were being beheaded.
