What "means of production" do you suggest I try to take ownership of? The term is very nebulous in this article. I have for instance ownership of my phone and computer. It can't be denied that those are among the means of production in the information age. How would Distributism help me monetize the writing and art I create with them?
You make a good point...in some respects, the information age has made Distributism a more viable option for more people. For instance, almost anyone can get a phone or computer and make money through them via monetized YouTube channels, Patreon, and (of course) Substacks.
However, from a practical perspective, most people interested in becoming owners of productive capital (e.g. to support a family) will want to choose a different route. There are many forms of productive capital in the world, and not all are equally resilient. A good place to start for Distributists would be forms of business or trades which provide essential goods and services such as farming, carpentry, plumbing etc. If you're interesting in diving deeper into this topic, the best place to start would be the writings of Rory Groves ("Durable Trades" and "The Family Economy"). While to my knowledge he does not refer to himself as a Distributist, that is in essence what he is trying to implement.
I am not a farmer so I cannot start there. The US Army trained me as an interior electrician but I was told I had to have a driver's license to get an electricians license and needed both to join the local union. The LDS Church teaches a principle called "Lift where you stand." The idea is to do the necessary work that you can do from where you currently are. Distributism does not appeal to me because I don't see a way that I can do it. It's well meaning to advocate that everyone join Mondragon or something like it, but it's not a practical plan. I do not produce any essential goods. I am currently a professional caregiver which is valuable to society but does not produce anything. I don't see how I could be a distributist in anything other than theory. And that's my other big complaint about the philosophy, it seems like a lot of theory around not much substance. Your original article is at least compelling enough to make me engage with the idea but so far I don't see any way to move from just an idea to a practical plan. It would need to be both executable and seem likely to produce positive results. Keep up the advocacy though. I enjoy our conversations.
To be fair, the main point of the article was to advocate the theory rather than discuss in-depth the way it could be implemented...that will be an upcoming article. Tackling all of those issues would have made the article far to long for this series. However, I will note that Groves's ideas are not limited to farming, so I apologize if I gave the impression that Distributism is limited to farming or homesteading. Being an electrician would certainly be a good place to start, though from your comments I'm uncertain as to whether that is practicable in your circumstances.
Regardless, any change from a capitalist to a distributist society will take time, and not everyone will be able to get on the distributist bandwagon right away simply due to the fact that we don't live in a distributist society at this point. Transitioning to one will be a gradual process, as increasing numbers of individuals gain ownership of their own means of making a living as the opportunity arises. At this point Distributism is an ideal to work towards rather than an immediately practicable reality for most people. That's not really a flaw in the theory as much as it is the reality that Distributism is more a goal than anything else at this point.
One of the things that puts me off about arguments regarding Distributism is that I'm so often referred to Belloc and Chesterton. This is a vastly different world from theirs and I'd rather live here than there. I have the same dynamic with a lot of conservativism. The people who want to live in the Early Christian World are welcome to do so but I will resist joining them whenever they try to make society conform to that with me in it.
I occasionally see bold statements like "We should bring back guilds." I don't even know what mythical past they are trying to invoke but it just reminds me of "Make America Great Again." What exactly do I have to give up to get to either of those fictional histories? No one has ever sold me on either. Ideals on a digital page are interesting but without real world action they will stay there. Sometimes I think that is for the best.
Well, there's an article about the practical implementation of Distributism in the pipelines, so I look forward to hearing your thoughts when it comes out!
What "means of production" do you suggest I try to take ownership of? The term is very nebulous in this article. I have for instance ownership of my phone and computer. It can't be denied that those are among the means of production in the information age. How would Distributism help me monetize the writing and art I create with them?
You make a good point...in some respects, the information age has made Distributism a more viable option for more people. For instance, almost anyone can get a phone or computer and make money through them via monetized YouTube channels, Patreon, and (of course) Substacks.
However, from a practical perspective, most people interested in becoming owners of productive capital (e.g. to support a family) will want to choose a different route. There are many forms of productive capital in the world, and not all are equally resilient. A good place to start for Distributists would be forms of business or trades which provide essential goods and services such as farming, carpentry, plumbing etc. If you're interesting in diving deeper into this topic, the best place to start would be the writings of Rory Groves ("Durable Trades" and "The Family Economy"). While to my knowledge he does not refer to himself as a Distributist, that is in essence what he is trying to implement.
I am not a farmer so I cannot start there. The US Army trained me as an interior electrician but I was told I had to have a driver's license to get an electricians license and needed both to join the local union. The LDS Church teaches a principle called "Lift where you stand." The idea is to do the necessary work that you can do from where you currently are. Distributism does not appeal to me because I don't see a way that I can do it. It's well meaning to advocate that everyone join Mondragon or something like it, but it's not a practical plan. I do not produce any essential goods. I am currently a professional caregiver which is valuable to society but does not produce anything. I don't see how I could be a distributist in anything other than theory. And that's my other big complaint about the philosophy, it seems like a lot of theory around not much substance. Your original article is at least compelling enough to make me engage with the idea but so far I don't see any way to move from just an idea to a practical plan. It would need to be both executable and seem likely to produce positive results. Keep up the advocacy though. I enjoy our conversations.
To be fair, the main point of the article was to advocate the theory rather than discuss in-depth the way it could be implemented...that will be an upcoming article. Tackling all of those issues would have made the article far to long for this series. However, I will note that Groves's ideas are not limited to farming, so I apologize if I gave the impression that Distributism is limited to farming or homesteading. Being an electrician would certainly be a good place to start, though from your comments I'm uncertain as to whether that is practicable in your circumstances.
Regardless, any change from a capitalist to a distributist society will take time, and not everyone will be able to get on the distributist bandwagon right away simply due to the fact that we don't live in a distributist society at this point. Transitioning to one will be a gradual process, as increasing numbers of individuals gain ownership of their own means of making a living as the opportunity arises. At this point Distributism is an ideal to work towards rather than an immediately practicable reality for most people. That's not really a flaw in the theory as much as it is the reality that Distributism is more a goal than anything else at this point.
One of the things that puts me off about arguments regarding Distributism is that I'm so often referred to Belloc and Chesterton. This is a vastly different world from theirs and I'd rather live here than there. I have the same dynamic with a lot of conservativism. The people who want to live in the Early Christian World are welcome to do so but I will resist joining them whenever they try to make society conform to that with me in it.
I occasionally see bold statements like "We should bring back guilds." I don't even know what mythical past they are trying to invoke but it just reminds me of "Make America Great Again." What exactly do I have to give up to get to either of those fictional histories? No one has ever sold me on either. Ideals on a digital page are interesting but without real world action they will stay there. Sometimes I think that is for the best.
Well, there's an article about the practical implementation of Distributism in the pipelines, so I look forward to hearing your thoughts when it comes out!