tv Road to the White House CSPAN September 21, 2015 1:00am-2:01am EDT
indeed a defective machinery is at the root of contemporary economics and materialistic civilization. it does not allow the human family to break free from such radically unjust situations. said that it is a question of not only alleviating the urgent needs through individual actions here and thee, but of uncovering roots of evil and proposing initiatives to make social, political, and economic structures more just and fraternal. erroneous autonomy. we ran a symposium last year. the catholic case against liberalism. it highlighted the differences between libertarian thought and social thought. one of my favorite quotes is
from highest the 11th. -- pius the 11th. so also the right ordering of economic life cannot be left to free competition of forces. for from this source, as from a poison to spring, have individual economic thinking. we could go back further to the gospel in which the blessed virgin mary's has -- he has filled the hungry with good things in the rich he has sent away empty. what is the difference with pope francis? i would submit that he is quite blunt. you cannot spin him. and benedict the 16th were often interpreted. i think they brought a distorting lens to what those two great hopes had to say. with pope francis there is no need to interpret him.
there is nothing confusing about it. you can go and talk to some immigrant workers who work picking the tomatoes that we will have with our salad at lunch. they are not confused by pope francis. the people leveling that charge do not like what he has to say. the critique is systemic. the change that he calls for is not merely the individual -- that individual capitalist become more virtuous. but it is deeper than that. if that were the case, if it was only a matter of people anymore virtuously, any system would do. i am reminded of madison who said if men were angels there would be no need for government. the pope's critique of the free market system has two tracks. one is based on facts on the ground and the other is at the level of theory. in both, he is not only condemning excesses that he is condemning the system. as he. a free market ideology
opposes almost all market and government intervention in the market. government is an expression of the common good. government is called upon to enact justice. said a just society is not directed against the market but demands the market be appropriately controlled. withould compare this another who said that liberty is freedom from the government. the 16th pointed out, free market area allows no room for gratuitous bus. itousness. is selfest problem interest versus the universal destination of goods. self interest is a sin. it cannot be wiggled into a virtue by reference to its socially creative consequences. christians mean something
different by creativity than what cap list mean. pope francis -- then what capitalists mean. a primary foundational leave from catholic social teaching is the universal destination of goods. that means that all of the goods of the world should be distributed so that everyone has enough to live and participate in society. this claim is prior to property rights. another point of divergence that comes up all of the time is that free market ideologues seem to have it in for organized labor. the church has explicitly endorsed the right of workers to unionize.
turning to the lived reality, this is even more important for pope francis. he has said on several occasions that reality is more important than ideas. that often asserted capitalism and other pieces of modernity have lifted millions out of poverty. if at the same time it excludes others, it it is an unjust system. it is inadequate as an economic system. transpacific the trade deal which seems to be stalled but if it goes through, when of the things that we can anticipate is that certain jobs will go to vietnam and malaysia. and they trade accords invite a race to the bottom with wages. we can look at the issue of debt crises.
why is that always the first option. i was pleased to see last month that the puerto rican bishops and other religious leaders have called for a different approach to the crisis that puerto rico is facing where it is an odd situation where they fall in not being a sovereign nation or a city and state. they are not mandating austerity but are giving a haircut to the hedge funds. i am for that. it is a good idea. we can look at the 2008 economic meltdown. he admitted that the crisis force tend to reconsider his neoliberal list assumptions. at the micro level, we can point -- we can consider the
circumstances of a shop owner who wishes to provide a living wage. living wage entered the american lexicon in 1906. catholic believe is that every person is entitled to a living wage. this shop owner is a good catholic and wants to live by his faith, and the competition across the street is not, what in the market rewards a good guy? gregory observes in his book, in unintended reformation, effect, outside the trade protection afforded by guilt, -- olic practices helped he describes the shift from the good society to the goods
society which raises an additional problem with capitalism. it is married to consumerism. think that we can say that we cap listen the west have succeeded where the communists failed. making a culture that is thoroughly materialistic instead of one big party, we have many idols in our department stores. i think of the war at christmas time where fox news gets all the departmentse stores dropped mary christmas in favor of happy holidays. if you walk through a department store between thanksgiving and christmas and you think the choice of happy holidays is the problem -- i would suggest that you have missed the point. they have taken a holiday about god becoming poor and in human flesh and turned it into a chance to teach and children how to be greedy.
out to the ethical considerations and difficulties. in free some debate market circles about whether the free market ideology even contains a moral sense. milton freeman said that economic freedom is an engine of itself. freedom has nothing to say about what an individual does with his freedom. the free market was compared to a game. in this view, the market is a mere tool that can be used well or badly with efficiency as the only relative bacteria. i think this is wrong. results can be efficient and unjust at the same time. usingrancis warns about efficiency as the only criteria for evaluating economic and other social activity. i would argue that there is an affect, what values does
the market celebrate? who are its heroes? and comparing these with a catholic view. the market celebrate a self-made man. not the man that evidences solidarity. it celebrates thrift and frugality, not gratuitousness. the market demands self-assertion, not self surrender. the market celebrates success and of course pope francis worships a crucified god. the market rents on competition, not cooperation. need i go on. american capitalism was celebrated in a show called lifestyles of the rich and famous. pope francis has ministered to the poor and the forgotten. the christian ethical vision has been clouded in u.s. culture. we have confused fortune with blessing.
pope francis reminds us that the good news needs to be brought to the port. if you want to know what god thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to. [laughter] finally, we will turn to the anthropological difference. i am not talking about excavating for tools. from 500 years ago. the church mean something rich and specific when it refers to the human person, a social meaning, not an autonomous understanding. these examples will highlight the difference. credits of government -- critics --government welfare programs should create on ramps to participate fully in society, not create disincentives to work or form a family. at a deeper level, a culture of entitlement and dependency is
precisely what free-market ideology cannot deliver but what the christian vision demands. people really are entitled to a living wage. they are entitled to a roof over their heads. to a secure retirement. and for christians, the human person is radically dependent, first on god. and secondly on one another. the bond of dependence is called solidarity or enable early s -- or being good neighbors. love ourd we are to neighbors as ourselves. the christian vision requires a focus on god and on the face of our fellow men and women. for the christians, generosity always takes priority. schindler said that selfishness is not yet mutual
generosity. another point of difference is the word freedom which is a deeply ambiguous word made to carry too much weight in a variety of contemporary political discussions. that we have at the basis of our constitutional -- this is not the freedom of the children of god. the catholic church cannot accept a negative freedom from conception as adequate. debate overs in the religious liberty. everyone focuses on the big debate. the more interesting debate was embrace an who american constitutional concept of freedom and the french intellectuals who saw its
problems. he saided about this, this was an issue that we have to skate around. as we have seen in the issues hhsounding the hh says -- contraception issues, we can no longer skate around these issues. teaches thatfaith we humans are called to communion, to solidarity with god and with one another. everything the church teaches about human relations including economics, comes from our police that the human person is created in the image of god. our most foundational belief about god is the trinity. that god himself is a communion of persons. it is in this image that we are created. announcece -- to do this solidarity is to challenge
the christians most basic police about who god is. in this great free country of to stand withree home we went. i stand with pope francis. [applause] >> thank you very much. our last week is jw richards who the research professor at school of economics at the catholic university of america. he is an executive editor of the stream. he is also the author of many books. he wrote indivisible in 2012. his articles and essays have been published in the harvard business review, the washington otherl, court report, and
venues. please help me welcome jw richards. [applause] >> it is wonderful to be with you and it is fun to be in the auditorium for these subjects. many of the things i was going to say are things that my fellow speakers have already spoken about. i do want to address this question about how we understand pope francis because unless you are a full-time pope follower, or you write for a catholic publication, virtually everything you know or think you know about a pope especially this one is coming secondhand or third hand from the media. what he actually says, very often, is often different. his statement about the dung of -- if you google that, what you will see is that pope francis called capitalism the dung of the devil.
in the speech, he does not use the word capitalism. uses thearely actually word capitalism. is delivered. my favorite example of media distortion has nothing to do with these topics. last year, he spoke to the academy of science and was talking about how the catholic theology understands god and it was reported in the english-speaking press that he had said to the scientists that god is not a divine being. let me let that sink in. the pope said that god is not a divine being. i solve this. could make money on media distortions. sitet to the vatican news and looked at english translations. it was there. that is where the media had gotten it. went to the original speech which had been in italian. what he had said is that god is
not -- it is a technical, philosophical term that means that god is not just a cop member of the universe -- a top member of the universe. it was translated, like a game of telephone internationally, had the pope saying that god was not a divine being. when you're tempted to think you know what the pope is saying, remember that. what we are going to talk about is thisw minutes today idea of capitalism through the eyes of pope francis. to focus on.i want i mentioned that pope francis berry rarely uses the word capitalism. until yesterday, i had not been able to find an example of him using that term at all. if the story is to be trusted, two years ago, in 2013, he gave
a talk to a soup kitchen in rome in which he referred to something he called savage capitalism. when you look at what he meant, the way he defined this term was the logic of profit at any cost. that is a very specific idea. it is clear to see that that is what he had in mind. as president garvey said, many of the things that the pope he does not say a lot about these particular things. letter, it isic only about eight pages in which he discusses economic topics. must sayay this -- we economy of exclusion. we must say no to the new ideology of money. to a financial
system that rules rather than serves. we must say no to the inequality which spawns violence. if you are a defender of the free market, as yourself the question. do you disagree with that? would you say no to an economy -- or an idolatry of money? say, he specifically condemns what he calls the absolute autonomy of markets. this is a term he has used several times. the same document, i want to reiterate these things, he refers to those who continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth will inevitably succeed in bringing about the greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. expresses a crude
and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power . trust unseenger forces and in the and visible hand -- and in the invisible hand of the market. some people try to spin what he says. i do think that pope francis has an impression -- let me fix this. it looks like it clicked off on me. i can keep going. here we go. michael was telling me before hand that this is the reason he does not use powerpoint. there you go. stick with a yellow pad. it is fair to say that his view of capitalism, as he understands
it, is generally not positive. he does have positive things to say about business and its role in creating wealth and in creating jobs. i think that is the best we can say. in taking many of his writings, i think that the better thing to do is to focus on what hope francis primarily is saying, and what he is intending to say. he says many things over and over and we can take these reoccurring themes. he speaks frequently about speculation. he used it when speaking to italy last week. he talks about economic ideally -- ideologies that embrace selfishness and greed. about thegain idolatry of money and ideologies
that idolatry money. a lot about greed. it comes up again and again. he speaks a lot about inequality. he does invoke as you heard a minute ago, the idea of the invisible hand. you can no longer trust in the guidance of this invisible hand. that is the term that adam smith came up with. behind all of this, i think this is crucial, whenever pope francis is talking about these things, invariably, he has one subject in mind. poverty. poverty is precisely the thing that motivates everything that he says about this. if you tend to be skeptical about what he says about the economy, at least understand this -- the things that he says
not because he is -- because he has an ideological predilection but he is profoundly concerned. say thatt is fair to some of the things that he says feels like a caricature. the question is, where does he specifically get the ideas that he has about what free-market capitalism or entrepreneurial capitalism actually are. he has a clear reason for that and it requires for us to make a useful distinction. many of the things that he says about the global financial that iand the crisis wrote a book in 2013 about the crisis. many of the things that he says about the system remake -- ring true.
true not as a critique of free-market capitalism but a critique of corporatism. if you say that what he is did are referring to is not the philosophical views of adam smith but the corporatism and cronyism that often stands in for those things in the united states but in -- and in many other countries as well. has francis as an argentine experienced for his entire life a particularly brutal form of heart corporatism. i think it is a crucial thing to realize about pope francis's experience and the things that he says when he is speaking
about things like the socioeconomic system in terms like this that he uses vaguely. in 1900, argentina was one of the world 10 wealthiest nations in terms of gdp per capita. because of this, there was massive immigration from northern europe in the early 20th century. you do not think of it this way anymore. it is largely the result of perrone and his wife who came to with a difficult ideologically to describe. a populous leftism which in many an aristocratic attempt. the common people but nevertheless implements political programs that are essentially forms of cronyism in which large economic actors working collusion with the state to enrich themselves but not to
enrich the common people. if you think about what pope francis is saying in that light, and think about his experience of cronyism in argentina, much of what he says starts to make sense. i do not want to say that he is clearly making these the sanctions. -- hes not distinguish does not make these distinctions and i would like to see him make those. i think it is important in reading what he says to understand his experience. an economic now basket case. in 169th out of 170 countries on the planet in terms of economic freedom. it is between the democratic republic of congo and the
republic of congo. they are not doing very well. the only countries that do worse are venezuela and cuba. abouter you want to say argentina, this is not a bastion of free-market capitalism. powerfulery overbearing state with several large private economic actors. massive amounts of any quality. not the nine inequality. nine -- not benign inequality. if that is your picture, of capitalism in the global economy, then what pope francis says make sense. -- imagine question for instance if you are a catholic philosopher and you study these things. you look at the imperial details
and different political economies. you have no delusions that any system will bring heaven on earth. nevertheless, you think on empirical grounds, that economic as attends freedom to be defended in the rule of law, private property rights, andlevels of corruption, wide-ranging economic freedoms is the best of the live economic alternatives are lifting large numbers of people out of absolute poverty. if you are aware for instance of the many things that you can see -- these are in." fax. we are not in a position of simply analyzing different ideologies. we are in a position to ask an empirical question. what makes of structures and institutions and economic structures is most conducive to human flourishing and to lifting large numbers of people out of
poverty? what if you are a a -- a faithful catholic. what are you to do? this is the dilemma. to understand what one needs to do, you have to understand a few things about the way in which authority works in the catholic church. has almostarvey entirely covered what i was going to say here. and you have to make distinction. so everyone -- at least everyone that's not catholic, all of my evangelical friends, if i asked them to study, it says that everything the pope says is infallible. fallibility entail? they say it means that everything in the book is infallible. but you can discover this within five minutes with a really good google search, but it tends to be people's idea of how it works. historical body of text that has come to be called catholic
continueaching, which to the peasant in which the are applying particular themes from catholic theology and natural dividinge current questions of economics and politics. refer to the central abiding and infallible corner of these things as the sum of these things at uc berkeley's the best in these documents. at the same time, is a mistake to think catholic social teaching equals some detailed catholic political policy. it is not as if it articulates in detail the precise detail of how a tax system or immigration policy should be together that is just and prudent. provides a clarifying lens for thinking through this issue but it does not provide the catholic
political position. that is why catholics of good politicaldisagree on topics while nevertheless adhering to catholic social teaching's. here's how pope john paul ii put it. i do not think he is saying anything that is idiosyncratic in this regard. meanne said, it does not that it is medically sealed from economic concerns. that is an economic fundamental mistake. a fundamental philosophical category, by which of you are catholic you want to reflect on. the intrinsic dignity of a
person. solidarity. subsidiarity. the common good. the categories you must and to bring to these categories. it is not going to answer every single question. that is a venture question based on your analysis and conclusion based on the empirical details as far as you understand them. pope benedict the 16th, pope francis is immediate necessity that this way. before he was pope, when he was head of the doctrine of faith, he was talking about morality and economics and how he thought these things should interact. as, yes, catholic teaching is not a third way. it is not a fully filled out system, but neither is it adverse to rhetorical. , a morality that believes it self able to
dispense with the technical knowledge of economics laws is but economists him. what we need is a maximum of economic and a maximum of moral reflection, so when these things come together i hold it much greater than the sum of its parts. , for the faithful catholic who is a faithful son or daughter of the church was also appreciative of the good that economic freedom brings to human beings. that would -- i would say, ought to be our goal. it would not to sort of separate these things. not say that catholic teaching is one thing but economics just involves is sort of impurecal questions. it's rather is this. it's distinguishing the economic ideologies that pope francis talks about, that michael talked about.
from the empirical results and discoveries and the theoretical insights of economics and integrating those things with the perennial principles of catholic social teaching. i would argue if that's done properly, they can be an advocate of economic freedom. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. we will now open it to q&a. please wait to be called upon. that's for the benefit of our viewers. microphone will come to you. and would you please be so kind to make your question really short and in a form of a question so we can get through as many of them as possible. so are there any questions in the audience? the gentleman over here. >> wonderful talks by everyone. my name is steven shore. i have a question that -- of a
dog that didn't bark. a classic distinction between accidents and substance, and when the holy father talks about the capitalism, is he clear as to whether he's attacking unfortunate accidents or the very substance itself? >> so far as i can tell he tends not to make that distinction. pope john paul did make that to capitalism. i'd frankly love them to make the difference but pope john paul ii, st. john paul ii said if by capitalism we mean this then no. if by capitalism means this then yes. but let's call it something else. and very often i think not just catholics but many people, many
critics of free market economics don't distinguish the metaphysical assumptions and the ideologies that might be the package of someone making the case for economic freedom and the real system itself or simply the question, just the empirical question. if we look at the types of systems and institutions that societies have, in which do societies tend to do better off or not? and frankly i did this as a college student is i confused say, the moral assumptions with the case for economic freedom. but the catholic doesn't need rand. there's plenty of ways to make the case for economic without that. i would argue we don't want to do that. if you want to be a catholic that is sort of in this area is use authentically catholic resources and develop the case for economic freedom based upon our empirical knowledge and key insights that are not dependent on ideologies.
division of labor, these sorts of things. subjective theory of value versus the labor theory value, these are insights drawn from economic study but they're not dependent on any particular ideology. marian: in the back. just one second. >> the man with the baby. >> i was wondering how you would define economic freedom and if that concept exists anywhere in the papal and cyclicals and formal documents? jay: is this for anyone? >> no. jay: the passage i referred to in a 2005 incyclical by benedict xvi, the only case there is a reference so far as i
know in a papal incyclical to the role of -- i forget if he uses the market or freedom, lifting billions out of poverty which may be a bit of an exaggeration. it's one sentence. there's a reference -- he is aware of the fact that india and china they've lifted people out of poverty. there's not a lot of reference to that. there's reference to freedom. the freedom that's discussed in catholic teaching is not a merely sort of negative freedom from. it's a freedom for, what i would call freedom for excellence and developing our purpose and the end to which we are designed for. >> yeah. i think this is my problem with jay's comments is i don't think you can't just say rand, we can dispose of this but keep that as if the one did not flow from the other. and i think this is where the rubber hits the road. all the way do you to the prudential judgments. this idea that somehow we have these theories but then we have
these prudential judgments where we can all disagree. there's something to that obviously, and we all have different experiences that we bring to our judgments of given situations. but prudential judgment is not a get out of jail free card. there are still things. what was just forced on greece, what is about to be forced on puerto rico is not just and therefore it is not acceptable and the economic system that makes those things necessary is itself implicated and indicted as unjust as well. and i -- we can talk all we want it's all so rosey and wonderful and this, it's not. i don't think we can benefit from, you know, -- the only other thing i just have to object to is the idea pope francis the poor benigned argentinan because he knows is crony capitalism. it's walk and you gone on to that, cronyism.
it's like walking into a burning house and complaining about the color of the curtains. i don't think that's the problem. i find it insulting because i don't think anyone saying of pope bennedict, he came from this snow globe village. he's capable of speaking of the universal pastor of the catholic church. he's an argentine and -- i think that's nonsense. jay: it's grotesque reference to what i said. i didn't say that. what i said, read pope francis and look at argentina and see if that helps you understand why he's saying what he says and if that's shaping what he's saying. i of course didn't say he must be relevant or device because he's from argentina which of course would be a ridiculous thing to say.
marian: that side over there. >> hi. my name is nona, a card-carrying economist. and i'm also probably a disappointed catholic. i was -- i was really put off by the handouts. marian: can we ask the question. forgive me. the time. >> i guess i want to say, even the question if you believe in capitalism the pope is saying we can do better and my childhood there is what we called liberation theology, which my irish mother -- marian: ok. thank you, thank you very much. can we do better and what about liberation theology? >> i take can we do better part because that's certainly an easy one. sure, we can. i, like both jay and michael
sean, there is a danger in flattening what the pope has to say in the same way as political writers in the united states or members of political parties in the united states tend to flatten things for public consumption. i think what the pope has to say about this is enormously complicated and sophisticated and i think it should be understood in the same way and not flattened. let me just give one example. when we talk about the economic recession that we went through in the united states in 2008 and affected much of the western world then and then has traveled around the globe to the other side, there's a tendency to say on the one hand, this is the fall of the bankers who were gouging people and just concerned with the profit motive and repackages mortgages and deceiving people.
that's one theory, popular on the left. there is another theory, popular on the right, that it's the fault of barney frank and fannie and freddie which forced the banks to give loans to those who really shouldn't be getting them. when the pope talks about this thing, he talks about both of those sides and a third side which is the kind of materialism or the consumerism of the borrowers. he said, look, you're all guilty of the same sin which is a lust for consumption and for acquiring things. the bankers want to make more money, the government can't be trusted because they're human beings like the bankers and given to their own prestigious and desires and the consumers who take out loans for 100% of their property value which they can't repay, they, too, are guilty of the same kind of materialism and consumerism. so we can all do better but we have to begin with ourselves.
so in this kind of world, there isn't a solution that says that unregulated free market capitalism will be the right way to go. he says we need the government to tame the excesses of capitalism, but we shouldn't trust the government either, and he knows that better than anybody having lived under fernandez. this is a personal message as much as it is a message of political reform. marian: anyone wants to comment on the liberation theology, does it have a place in the catholic teaching today? michael sean: the condemnation was not -- there are other liberation theologians that waeren't condemned. it is the condemnation, the
understanding of the human person that certain theologians put forward and certainly materialistic reductionism in understanding of the person. i have argued you could cut, copy and paste that condemnation of certain liberation theologians and apply it to, say, an institute today. you would have to change some direct objects. but they make the exact same mistakes in their effort to defend or to baptize free market capitalism which is a -- which is something that cannot be done and at the level of -- at that theoretical level which is the differences i quoted in my remarks, these are directly in contradiction with one another. so i think -- but the night he was elected, i spoke to a friend and i had to go on their tv show and talk about him. i didn't know much about him. a lot of us didn't.
the thing to remember -- we knew that he was opposed to -- he said the latin american bishops never stopped asking the question -- what does it mean to exercise a preferential option for the poor? even after this condemnation. this gets to earlier the discussion of the levels of authority that, you know, the pope obviously when he's speaking on the plane, it's a different level when he's writing an encyclical. the level of authority could not be higher even on the plane because he's speaking straight from the gospel and there is no higher authority in the catholic faith than the gospel of jesus christ. this is where some of us -- oh, we can part this level of authority we are suspicious of that. and we americans don't always like to hear that. jay: i think michael is right.
i would object to certain aspects of liberation theology on impurecal grounds, again. just to give one example. an idea from an argentina person which held the southern hemisphere, at least south america and central america was poor because north was rich. the fundamental theme in the prominent liberation theologian gustavo gutierrez, if you read his entire argument, it hinges on this dependency, the poverty of the south is a causal relationship between the poverty of the south and the wealth of the north. even gustavo gutierrez in later editions of theology liberation based on the empirical details of economics actually abandon impurecal questions are very, very important here. there are many questions we are
talking about economics that are not merely theoretical, not merely philosophical. there is data on it. it's important, sort of respect the catholic has on science. to take a look at these kinds of things. >> i'm not an economist but i was a lawyer and i was 15 years on the staff on the senate banking committee. so i want to read something here from the actually incyclical itself where the pope says the principle of profits frequently isolated from other considerations reflects a misunderstanding of the very concept of the economy. now, you can have different types of capitalism, in my view. in the united states, from world war ii until about 1985 or so, we can stakeholder theory of capitalism that you had responsibility out -- marian: could you please ask a question. >> the idea that capitalism has responsibility to its workers, to its community and others and then we shifted into this shareholder capitalism where the
only responsibility is to your shareholders and the c.e.o.'s who did tie to shareholder value, that's quite a different capitalism from what we used to have in this country 30 years ago. i think that's the important thing to understand. you can have different types of capitalism. it's not capitalism as such but whether capitalism can be moderated to produce benefits for the whole society. jay: i think you are talking about particular business models in which, for instance, managers are rewarded, according to short-term sort of monitoring of profits or something like that. i think it's a very bad business model. i think there's a lot of evidence to that. on economic grounds you can make the case that it's immoral to treat profits as the only end of a business. i think the opposite of profit is loss.
if it's not an indicator you'll probably be in trouble. nobody will have a job. the short-term indication, the incentive structures that encourages managers and c.e.o.'s to work for short-term profits but long-term destruction are very bad business models. i totally agree. >> given pope francis's views, what are his perspectives on taxation and more broadly, what are his views on what the state should do to battle inequality? >> i think i can answer your question in a different way. there was a photograph in "the washington post" about three weeks ago when they were having the horrible wildfires in washington state. there is a man whose home was saved. he had on a t-shirt that said lower taxes, less government equals more freedom. [laughter] now, that firefighter was not
only a government employee but i can guarantee you he was a union member and this guy whose house had just been saved was probably a tea partier because they make those t-shirts. that is the problem. now perhaps they should have let it burn and he would be not concerned about all the possessions. the man was on -- it was like the people who are opposed to obamacare when they first passed it and keep the government's hands off my medicare. what? again, the government -- the catholic church has never had this kind of hostile view which goes all the way back to before the american revolution. this hostile view of government. as, you know, the leviathan. that's not how catholic culture and theology ever viewed it. i think that's -- to answer your question, we wouldn't view taxes as repatience. when i ran a business, i remember the owner saying, unless there's 100% tax, you always still have an incentive to make more money.
we forgot that since the reagan years, haven't we? this idea that oh, if you raise the taxes, people will lose their incentives. they got to put their money in something. i never bought that. marian: one question over there in the back. a gentleman. >> yes. this is for all of you because you are all in higher education. where do you see sort of the practical implementation of francis's vision coming from within higher ed outside of sort of professional ethics courses? john: i couldn't quite -- >> where you can see an implementation of francis's position? jay: well, to plug in catholic u, what we're trying to do is bring together economics and economics as science but
economics was originally part of course of essentially ethics, of ethical philosophy. the business school of catholic u is trying to bring together an integration of catholic social teaching with economics and philosophy. it's at least one place that's being done. i'm not saying it's the only catholic institution trying to do that but it's the mission of the school in trying to do that. john: i second that point. one of the interesting points that francis's predecessor make, universities are called universities because they aspire to a universal view of human knowledge that we should not segregate disciplines into economics and political theory and ethics and philosophy that these disciplines ought to be talking to one another. one of the aspirations of our university is to do that very thing. economics divorced from ethics
brings about the kind of problems that the pope is worrying about. michael sean: in our little institute of catholic u, i shouldn't say we have 50 fellows but we will keep going on our erroneous autonomy theories. we'll do another one next june. we are at the beginning levels of trying to put that together and it focuses on these issues very, very clearly and we keep waving the pope francis flag. marian: that's all we have time for. i'm deeply grateful to the panel for this discussion. thank you so much for coming. lunch is upstairs. please come again. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
imported society and the changed society. >> so she told them that they would have to have a search warrant and she demanded to see the paper. which they refused to do so she grabbed it out of his hand to look at it. and thereafter, the police officer handcuffed her. >> i can't imagine a better way to bring the constitution to life than to tell the human stories behind great supreme court cases. >> greg komatsu boldly opposed the forced internment of japanese americans during world war ii. after being convicted for failing to report for relocation, mr., so took his case all the way to the supreme court.
of oure often in many most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. you had to pick one freedom that was the most essential to the functioning of a democracy, it has to be freedom of speech. lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what to learn in a society of 310 million different people who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. >> landmark cases, and expiration of 12 historic supreme court decisions and the human stories behind them. a new series on c-span produced in cooperation with the national constitution center. debuting monday, october 5 at nine: 00. -- at 9:00 p.m. and landmark cases, the book features the 12 cases we
selected for the series with a brief introduction into the background, highlights and impact of these kay's, written by veteran supreme court journalist tony morrow, published by c-span in cooperation with international quarterly press. yet your copy at www.c-span.org relations between the united states and taiwan. and then attorney general loretta lynch on community policing and changes to the criminal justice system. ther that, fbi officials on challenges of cyber security and data encryption. on monday, the senate for strategic and international studies held a discussion on taiwan's politics and upcoming elections. panelists discuss u.s. relations with taiwan as well as china. this is about an hour and 15 minutes.