 This is Anabaptist Perspectives and we are back to talk about money again. This series has presented some suspicion of things like interest, usury, as we talked about in the episode about economics and pre-modern Catholicism, but there's a positive vision or something that we can believe in rather than just critiquing abuses. Stephen Russell is with us again to talk about something called distributism. So introduce us to distributism. Well, the previous episode was about Catholicism especially and its view of money. And this view called distributism also comes out of modern Catholicism. Distributism is something that arose at the end of the 1800s as Europe and the West in general started to experience some definitely harmful aspects of the industrial revolution. And because of that, there was a lot of turmoil among the working people and out of that comes socialism and Marxism. Of course, the thrust there is revolution and destruction destroy those that have wealth and spread it out, redistribute it. That's not what distributism is about. Pope Leo XIII became quite aware of the problems. It's probable that the fact that many, many, many years after the industrial revolution had already started as the problems mount and the workers start to get upset about their situation. That's probably what woke the Catholic Church up. And Leo XIII issued an encyclical called Rerum Novarum which means about new things. And so the point here was to say that the economy is developing in a certain way and we need to think about new ways to help people because right now things are going in a bad direction. Poor people are getting poor, rich people are getting richer. And so anyway, he recognized this and he stated that work is good and that people ought to be invested in their work. Now, at this point, that was mostly farming. And so one of his points was it's good for people to actually own their own land and provide for themselves, their families and perhaps have extra so that they can sell the extra and buy other things that they might need. But the emphasis was work is good and we need to get people invested in their work and what they're doing and make it something that they can actually own and be excited about. And then distributism sort of comes out of his writing Rerum Novarum. It comes out of that and especially some English Catholics started talking about how to do this, how to practically do this. Chesterton is one of them and another man is named Bellock. And I think it would be good to talk about what their aim was in trying to develop this idea that Pope had talked about that it's good for us to be invested in what we're doing, kind of work we're doing, that it actually is something that, you know, I can do this work and I can be proud of it and I'm proud that I can take care of my family. Well, these English Catholics said that their focus should be on the family, not on individuals. This was definitely the modern world was moving towards a focus on the individual and the individual was important and they weren't denying that, but the unit, the essential unit of society is the family. And so something needs to be done that would strengthen the family and make it sort of the key aspect of society. The point of distributism isn't redistributing wealth. It is enabling people by somehow distributing the means of production, helping each person to develop his skills, to develop the gifts God's given him. So if he's a farmer, help him have a farm and farm well. And if he's a blacksmith, help him to get the tools he needs and get his little shop started. The best thing is when the family, if possible, and maybe a little bit, maybe the extended family, if it needs to be a larger enterprise, that there's a focus there. The emphasis isn't on making a lot of money. The emphasis is on helping each person to develop the skills that he has and to develop other things like if I have a gifting to sing or to play an instrument, I should be able to produce enough that I have time for other things. I have time for people. I have time for learning an instrument. I have time for reading things. I have time to go to church and actually help out there. So the focus is the individual, that the family, that people in general become what they can become. The emphasis is on small is good, small is beautiful. And let's have each person become basically a craftsman, a person who can do well whatever it is that he feels gifted in. Now, what I've talked about is mostly family-sized businesses. Some things have to be bigger than that. It just has to be. So, for instance, if you want to fill trains, you need a company bigger than... I mean, I don't think you and your wife can build a train. And I can't build a Boeing 777. So, there are companies that need to be bigger than that. Distributism would say the best way to do that is to have a co-op. Have a company where at least as many as possible of the employees are actually, they have a part in that company. They actually own it to some degree. There is a particular example of this that I think is a really good thing to think about. In Spain, after World War II, the economy was not that good. And in Northern Spain, there was a priest who was concerned about this and he started to try to practice distributist principles in a town called Mondragon. He started a company called Mondragon because of the town. And this is a fascinating story. I don't know exactly where they are today, but they started several different co-ops to do industrial work, to do financial work, to do retail work, and even educational work. The people that were, at least originally, that were part of the company were, in essence, holders of that company. They were co-op. They were in a co-op. And so they're huge nowadays. They have about 80,000 workers. They have factories in over 100 countries, I believe. I'm not quite sure if they've held on to all of their ideals. As you get bigger, that's always a problem. And some of the reading I've done sounds like some people have felt that the original care that each person had for the other is missing, maybe at least sometimes today. But the point is that we are in this together. And that would mean things like, let's say if my father was sick and I need to take care of him, if I'm one of the people that's a part owner of this co-op, I probably can get some time off. Somebody will fill in for me. And later on, I will fill in for somebody else. There's that kind of flexibility because I own it. I'm one of the people that owns it. All of the people that are part of the co-op make decisions together, at least as much as possible. And one of the fascinating ways they do this is they recognize that the managerial staff has more responsibility and should be paid more. But it's the people in that particular department that get together and decide what multiple of the incoming salary or wage for a person coming into the company, what multiple of that does the management at the top get? There are many departments under Mondragon, the Mondragon co-operative company name. And each one of them will decide what multiple the management gets. It goes anywhere from three to nine. Three times the entry or nine times the entry. And I think I read somewhere that roughly five is the average for all of the Mondragon departments. So it's a very different approach to running a company. And it involves those people because of ownership and because of helping to make decisions. It involves directly the people that work there. So it's more than just working there. I'm not working there for a salary. This is actually something that I own in the sense of I claim that it's important to me. So the distributism emphasizes family and what's local. But what you're describing here sounds like there might be principles that would also apply to larger companies. Yes, but even the larger company is going to be a co-op of some sort, a mutual, a corporation or an organization where there's a mutual ownership and responsibility back and forth. So before I began to talk with you about economics, I never heard of distributism. So I guess I'm wondering is this really a thing? Like you mentioned Pope Leo, you mentioned Chesterton, English Catholics, this company called Mondragon. But who takes this seriously? Is it really a codified economic theory? Or what could we direct our audience towards? For like the definitive definition of distributism? Well, Chesterton was a big motivator for this whole concept. And I would suggest reading his book, What's Wrong with the World? That gives you some sense of what he thinks a well-functioning economy might look like. Or actually society. It's broader than just the economy. He also has a book was put together recently called The Hound of Distributism. So it's articles that he wrote. So those would be two things one could look at and read. There are people out there that are writing about it today from a modern perspective, how it could work in the modern world. Mondragon is an example of a large corporation that is functioning as a co-op, working together. There's one in Northern Italy. I can't remember the name of that. There was a small group of artists and artisans in England that functioned for about 70 years. They had trouble passing on the vision. So from about 1920 to 19, I think it was 1989, what's called the Guild of St. Joseph and St. Dominic. And they lived, oh, I have a quote about their motto. Let me see if I can find that. Men rich in virtue, studying beautifulness, living in peace in their houses. It kind of expresses the whole thing. Living in virtue, looking for beauty, producing beauty, living in your own home peacefully. And so there are people that have done it, but one of the key things is it can't be imposed by government. And I think government can perhaps provide a setting through the laws that makes it possible. But by and large, distributists would say, government can't do this. This has to be something that committed believers start to do one by one. I have some friends that live near Pittsburgh and they purposefully look for small farmers that they can go to to get milk and eggs and other things. It's a little thing, but it's something. It might cost a little more to go to the private farmer and get the milk there or get the eggs there. But there's actually something that you're encouraging that is more important than maybe the extra money you're spending there. So yeah, it is a thing. Catholics are more aware of it probably than anybody else. I think that this is how most conservative Anabaptists actually approach life, something like this. They care for the family, they care about the business and their skills that they have. So the thing that I like about distributism is if we read about it and they have actually thought through why they're doing it and what some of the pitfalls are and how to do it well. And I think when we don't actually think consciously about intellectually why we should do this and how we should do it, I think we're in danger of eventually losing it. So I'm suggesting let's look at distributism and see how it fits in with what we have traditionally tended to do and learn from it and maybe improve it and do better ourselves. This approach to economics, it really is something that has to be done individually or by family and being committed. And I think that yeah, government can perhaps make it easier for those things to happen, but I'm a little nervous when it tries to become the motivator there. I don't think it's gonna work too well in the long run. I think maybe that's a crucial point because it sounds to me like at least some of the concerns that distributism is responding to are ones that the socialists also want to respond to. But what you said a bit earlier, I think is important in that distributism shouldn't be imposed by the state. And that would be a pretty clear distinction between it and socialism. And in some ways, other political theories also that try to demand that economics happen a certain way. Distributism is trying to take a path that's between the kind of laissez-faire capitalism that was being experienced in the late 1800s and the state socialism that Marx and other people were starting to say is the solution to that problem. And this says that both of those are an accumulation of wealth and power in a few hands and that either in any case, that's wrong. It's dangerous. It brings bad results. And distributism is about the things that develop wealth are distributed among many people and that the wealth itself isn't all heaped up by just one person. To a large degree, it's an attempt to get us to recognize that our security isn't in heaping up a lot of wealth, that our security is first of all in God but also in his people. Instead of a kind of cutthroat economic system where I'm trying to undersell you to get as much business as I can, distributism would actually say, we should kind of help each other. I will have my little farm here and I will provide food in this area, you'll provide food in another area. And we actually might end up helping each other rather than going after each other. We're trying to buy you, I'm not gonna try and undersell you and then you go bankrupt so then I buy your farm. That's why it can't be imposed by the government. It's gotta be something in here. There's one more thing I wanted to say, I'd mentioned Mondragon and an American sociologist went to see what's going on in that town in Northern Spain, which is the hub of this corporation. And this is what she said, her name is Barbara Peters and she teaches at Southampton College which is a part of Long Island University and she said, in Mondragon I saw no signs of poverty. I saw no signs of extreme wealth. I saw people looking out for each other. It's a caring form of capitalism. So it is a kind of capitalism, people own their own things but it's not the kind of capitalism that the emphasis is on, I need to keep up lots and lots and lots of money. I just think there's a marvelous testimony from someone that I don't know what her religious belief would be or her views on economics but as a sociologist she's saying, this town is really strange. It's not quite what you'd expect. What does distributism have to offer to the entrepreneurs and employees who are listening to this? Well, what I just mentioned, which is if I am fully invested in my work because it fits the giftings that God has given me and it enables me in a good way to provide for those that I'm responsible for. And it also gives me an opening to do something for the community because my work is gonna at least be needed by somebody in the community. So it opens up this whole different approach where who I am and what I do is actually important instead of I work here to make a paycheck so that I can go out on the weekend and have a wild time. So it's totally different approach. So that's for the worker but I think that fits for the owner too. He's gonna have different kind of workers if he's actually somehow engaged his workers in becoming part of his business. In other words, maybe owning something in it or maybe giving good bonuses at the end of the year. I don't think there's any one way this has to be done but I think the owner of a business is gonna have better employees, people who are more engaged and committed to what he is doing. And another thing is the emphasis is not on becoming big. I mean, for some things you need to be big and Mondragon is an example of having a large company but maybe an advantage to at least some employers would be that they could actually help someone else. Let's just say if someone is working on construction he has several construction crews. Maybe instead of adding more and more crews he could help someone that he has seen has really good potential to start his own construction company. And it takes, he doesn't have to feel that pressure of figuring out what five crews are gonna do or what 10 crews are gonna do and what he's got to do with the government and all that. He can actually help others develop their giftings and he doesn't have to bear the weight of having this big, big company. Now I'm not a businessman. So maybe a businessman will how and laugh at what I'm saying, but maybe there's some truth to it. Yeah, well both of us are employees and work for somebody else. So the practical implications of this are a bit different for us. This sounds very compelling. I should think about it more before I commit but this sounds very compelling. Before we end, can we mention again the resources that you spoke about? Two Chesterton books, right? Two Chesterton, one is a book that he wrote called What's Wrong with the World. And the other one is a recent compilation of some of his essays on distributism and I believe it's called The Hound of Distributism. So those would be two places to go to. You can Google distributism and you will find some modern writers on it. If you have a Catholic neighbor, you might ask, they might be involved in trying to be distributist in how they do their shopping and how they do their work. They are the people that I would say mostly are aware of this. Yeah, so I'll be in touch with you after this interview and we'll find some links and put those in the show notes so our audience will be able to look up these books and resources. Good. Well, thank you so much for talking with us about distributism. I've enjoyed it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for joining us for this episode. We invite you to join our monthly partner program. Monthly partners are key to the financial sustainability of Anabaptist Perspectives. Partners also gain access to bonus content, including our exclusive podcast where we respond to audience questions and comments. Sign up at anabaptistperspectives.org.