Download [Right Click] Play in New Window
Smaller/Mobile Version: Part 1 Part 2
Today we are joined by John Medaille, a retired professor from the University of Dallas and the author of The Vocation of Business, and Toward a Truly Free Market, as well as many other writings in periodicals from Res Publica to the Remnant. We talk about Distributism and the economic issues facing Distributist economic theory, government, labor and many other issues which delve deeper into Distributism than the normal reflections on Chesterton.
NB: Views and opinions elsewhere expressed on this website are not necessarily shared by John Medaille or the University of Dallas.
NB#2: Please forgive my Distributist chickens which you can hear in the background towards the beginning. They are no doubt looking for mic time. 🙂
The Vocation of Business
Towards a Truly Free Market
John Medaille on the Distributist Review
John Medaille on the Remnant
If you like this or any of our podcasts, interviews, etc., which are provided for free, please consider donating as little as a $1. God bless you.
Interview Notes:
Distributive Justice in Aristotle
Fanfani: Catholicism, Protestantism, and Capitalism
The Velocity of Money
Gawker Article: $#@! is going to hit the fan! A millionaire reveals the lie of low wages
Hieron of Alexandria and the Steam Engine
Speenhamland System
Poor Law Amendment Act
Economic Rent
Libertarianism was originally called “socialism”
*We made a mistake during the interview, it is Pierre Joseph Proudhon, not John Pierre*
The Well Read Anarchist 002: Pierre Joseph Proudhon
More on Pierre Joseph Proudhon
Thomas Woods Quote referenced at 33:25
Employee Owned Businesses
Information on the Emilia-Romanga Cooperative
Rerum Novarum
Quadragesimo Anno
Against those who argue the Social Encyclicals are not binding
Currency Manipulation
How Wal-Mart makes it big on tax subsidies
The Domesday Book
The Medieval Machine by Jean Gimpel
Patents slow down or stop innovation (libertarian perspective, still good)
Mondragon
Comparison of the Emilia-Romana and an equivalent size and population in Northeast Ohio
Emilia Romagna and Northeastern Ohio
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
More on Mondragon
Jack Stack, Stake in the Outcome
Semler and Semco
Spontaenous Order
Roads Fit for People
Equality Streets
***When John said a “Jay” was a country person, I added the Latin term Rusticus, which is the Roman word for “Country-Bumpkin”. In case anyone is wondering. ***
Towards a Truly Free Market
I just left another comments so allow me to make a passing one here as well: Very interesting! Although you are a bit uncritical at times when it would have been more interesting and educating to have the interviewee pushed a bit to explain and defend a thesis or statement further, because they were often radically opposed to “common knowledge.”
What exactly is “common knowledge” and why should I take it into account since so often what people call common knowledge turns out to be quite false anyway. I feel I do a good job at raising questions and objections to the positions of most of the people I interview, though I give them a wide birth to talk. I make no claims to objectivity, and I already have agreement with those I interview at least to the extent of the topic at hand. But I did take many libertarian responses to challenge John with.
You should take mainstream views into account because it is often false and you (or the person you interview) want to show why and how they are, and showcase (in this case) distributism as the other. The fact that there is no claim to objectivity is why it would be easier to pick apart the false common knowledge by questions and answers instead of simply steam-rolling over it and laughing.
I listened to it some days ago but as I remember it was a back and forward of: “Libertarians will say…”, “Answer.”; “And then libertarians will say…”, “Answer.”; and no “But…”, “You say that x, what if y?” That is what I mean by steam-rolling over it, a simple rejection instead of a… dissection (perhaps?). You could argue that this isn’t what they’re meant for but I am afraid that leads to that only the already inaugurated can take part, and I think that would be a wasted opportunity.
Thanks for your reply!
Well, we only have an hour and a half to two hours. The other thing is, I did take the general mainstream views into account in regard to the Libertarians. They’re objections always come down to “crony capitalism, its not real capitalism.” So we refuted that. None of that is to say any of it is definitive and we will never return to more careful considerations. I wanted to cover a number of different issue with John. Thanks.
Pingback: An Italian Critic of Capitalism « The Thinking Housewife