The Priority of Labor:

...A close reading of Baum's tightly reasoned and carefully nuanced analysis of the encyclical clearly shows (pace Michael Novak) that Baum is most certainly not in favor of "collectivism" in Novak's italicized and obviously pejorative use of the term...

...Novak's name has become almost synonymous with "democratic capitalism...

...I am sorry to be so pessimistic and embarrassed to sound so anti-intellectual, but unless even the conservative press is lying to us, we are in a terrible economic mess both at home and abroad, and, to my way of thinking, a prolonged theoretical and partisan debate about "democratic capitalism" versus "socialism" is not likely to be of much help to us in getting out of it.elp to us in getting out of it...

...Unless I am badly mistaken, the likely alternative is to go on aimlessly debating theoretical and highly ambiguous concepts which may be useful, within limits, as academic tools of the trade but are less meaningful, even to intellectuals, and much less useful to economic and political practitioners in the dangerously unsettled 1980s than those who are ideologically stuck with them seem to think they are...

...It is regrettable, I think, that the debate about the encyclical has taken such an ideological turn...

...George G. Higgins both of these readings seem correct," he has made it clear in more than one public forum that he himself profoundly disagrees with Baum's interpretation of the document...

...On the face of it, Novak and Baum (if I may again pair them here as representative types) appear to be almost irreconcilably at odds with one another in their widely divergent, indeed almost contradictory, readings of the encyclical...

...The creative tension between the principles of subsidiarity and socialization is replayed in the present encyclical in the double demand for democracy at the workplace and for the planning of the economy...

...Certainly they themselves seem to think that this is so...

...By and large, the latter tend, and properly so, to be very specific in their criticism of the deficiencies of socialism, including democratic socialism, but, conversely, they tend to slip into vague generalities when, if ever, they get around to talking about the deficiencies of capitalism...

...Government itself is not the planning agency...

...Let me switch gears, then, and conclude with a bit of wishful thinking as to where we might go from here...

...It is to Baum's credit, parenthetically, that he is far more critical of Marxism and of state socialism than any of his conservative or neoconservative counterparts in North America have been of capitalism in their own commentaries on Laborem Exercens...

...I take it that, to Novak, this somehow smacks of "collectivism" or "statism...

...Walsh argues, however, that if they want to be heard by those in the third world and elsewhere who may be attracted to socialism, they will have to look more closely and less apologetically to the systemic problems of capitalism, will have to cease projecting onto pro-socialists their "own prepolitical view of socialism," and will have to meet the critics of capitalism on their own ground and in quite specific terms...

...When you stop to think about it, of course, this is not surprising, for, to the best of my knowledge, Baum is one of the few English-language theologians who can honestly claim to have made a serious in-depth study of Marxism...

...Small is beautiful, but, big whenever necessary...

...The encyclical speaks of 'a wide range of intermediate bodies,' with economic purposes, enjoying 'real autonomy' with regard to the public powers and pursuing their aims 'in honest collaboration with each other and in subordination to the demands of the common good.' " Proponents of "democratic capitalism" and American neoconservatives in general attach great importance, and rightly so, to such "intermediate bodies," but, unless I have missed something in their writings on this subject, they tend to see these intermediate structures as being parallel to the corporate structures in the domestic and world economies and do not envisage their being institutionally involved, as autonomous bodies with economic purposes, in the economic decision-making process of either individual nations or of the world community of nations...

...In advocating decentralized, pluralistic planning, he has, to repeat, accurately reflected both the letter and the spirit of Laborem Exercens...

...I noted above that Novak, by implication at least, faults Baum for stressing those sections of the encyclical that emphasize the need for "planning...

...He notes, for example, that Gregory Baum, writing in The Ecumenist, reads the encyclical for "its extended critical and creative dialogue with Marxism," whereas four "respectful and sympathetic" observers, writing under the auspices of the Heritage Foundation, believe that the encyclical "confirms the basic principles and practices of liberal capitalist democracies, which they as Catholic scholars have come to cherish...

...Baum says, for example, that "the principle of decentralization (the democratization of the industries) and the principle of centralization (the planned economy) constitute a dynamic process in society that protects the well-being of all and the relative freedom of persons and groups of persons...

...In any event, those who disagree with the encyclical's emphasis on the need for economic planning should direct their criticism at the document itself and should not try to put the monkey on Baum's back...

...To make a long story short, it would appear, alas, that we are getting bogged down again in the perennial either/or, black-and-white debate about "democratic capitalism" on the one hand and "socialism" on the other - and presumably never the twain shall meet...

...I could well be wrong about that, of course, but that's my honest reading of the fairly extensive neoconservative literature on the role of intermediate structures under a system of "democratic capitalism...

...In fairness to Baum, it is important to make these points explicitly and with emphasis, lest Novak's capsule-like summary of Baum's reading of the encyclical be interpreted or misinterpreted to imply that Baum's position on the two matters referred to above (or on any of the other major issues covered in the encyclical) is at odds with that of John Paul II...

...Baum's book, which I highly recommend (not as the last word on the encyclical, but as an extremely intelligent commentary on its contents) covers more points than I can even touch upon, much less seriously discuss, in this review...

...It seems to me, then, that both writers (and the rest of us as well) would be better advised to analyze the encyclical on its terms and in its specific terminology rather than their own, for the fact is that the document, in certain key respects, is critical of both "socialism" and "capitalism" (neo- as well as "rigid" capitalism) in the historically situated and commonly accepted meaning of these ambiguous terms...

...In industrial society, big is unavoidable...

...The traditional principle of subsidiarity which was designed to protect the small units capable of looking after their needs from interference by a higher power," he correctly points out, "was complemented by the principle of socialization, enunciated especially by Pope John XXIII, which said that whenever smaller units are unable to provide for their members, then higher levels of authority must promote cooperation so that people will be protected...

...It is not surprising, then, that he has concluded, in all honesty, that the encyclical is basically supportive of his own economic philosophy...

...I say this, among other reasons, because both "democratic capitalism" and "socialism" carry so much partisan baggage and are fraught with so much ambiguity that they have become, at least in North America, little more than shibboleths...

...It is not for me, of course, to disagree with them in this regard...

...Many neoconservatives appeal to the principle of subsidiarity as an irrefutable argument against any kind of central economic planning...

...In my opinion, if I may say so respectfully about two very good friends, Novak and Baum are, in varying degrees, jointly to blame in this regard...

...The fact is that the encyclical explicitly calls for both national and international planning...

...Baum, for his part, claims to have found in the encyclical a defense of "socialism...

...People are free, of course, to disagree with Laborem Exercens on this point, but, again, they ought to aim their fire at the document itself and not at Baum who had nothing to do with its preparation...

...Laborem Exercens," he writes, "envisages a central planning that invokes the participation of many institutions...

...The point is that while his vocabulary differs radically from Baum's, he, too, sees the need to reconcile the principle of decentralization with the principle of centralization, although, again, he would never use that precise terminology...

...It is also clear that Baum fully subscribes to the encyclical's repeated emphasis on man-woman as the subject of human labor...

...Call it wishful thinking on my part, but I persist in entertaining the faint and flickering conviction (or at least the vague impression) that if Novak and Baum (and all the rest of us) could declare at least a temporary moratorium on the use of ambiguous and ideologically loaded terms such as "democratic capitalism" and "socialism" and could concentrate, if only for a time, on the grubby task of trying to reconcile, in very practical, non-ideological North American terms, the principle of subsidiarity and the principle of socialization (in Baum's terminology, decentralization and centralization, and in Novak's terminology of "the twin values of the inimitable person and the common good"), we might begin to get somewhere...

...Since they have both commented extensively on Laborem Exercens, I assume that they will not object to being paired here as surrogates for their respective followers...

...Planning, as called for in Laborem Exercens, does not mean "collectivism" or "statism," Baum knows this perfectly well and has said so quite explicitly...

...While Novak says that "in some sense, THE PRIORITY OF LABOR A COMMENTARY ON "LABOREM EXERCENS" Gregory Baum Paulist, $5.95, 152 pp...

...I realize that in many ways they are miles apart in their social thinking...

...In any event, he does not disassociate himself from the encyclical' s call for a " continued revision of (rigid) capitalism" aimed at giving workers a greater share in the management, ownership and/or profits of corporate businesses...

...That simply is not the case...

...I myself would prefer a different word than that, but, semantic preferences aside, by the time Baum has finished embroidering the word "socialism" with qualifying adjectives, the word has lost much of its historic meaning...

...Enough of that, however...

...His neoconservative counterparts cannot hold a candle to him in this regard...

...Baum is far ahead of them in this regard, and they will have to run very fast to catch up with him...

...In my opinion, he greatly exaggerates the degree to which this "revision" has taken place or is currently taking place in the American system of "democratic capitalism" - but that's another matter...

...As Joseph L. Walsh has acutely observed in a discerning and well-balanced review of Novak's Democratic Capitalism (Cross Currents, Summer 1982), apologists for "democratic capitalism" have performed a necessary and useful service in pointedly raising all of the hard ethical questions about socialism, including, again, democratic socialism...

...is to give more consideration to theological conceptions of the person and the community...

...Pluralism must be institutionalized even in the economic infrastructure...

...Books: GETTING ON WITH THE TASK MICHAEL NOVAK, author of Democratic Capitalism, has observed that "one of the most interesting features of Laborem Exercens is that both the right and the left have acclaimed it...

...On this point, the burden of proof is on Novak...

...I would also point out that while Baum holds (and correctly so, in my opinion) that the encyclical does, in fact, reflect an "extended critical and creative dialogue with Marxism," he himself is incisively critical of orthodox Marxism on all essential points...

...Yet I sometimes think, perhaps naively, that they may have a wee bit more in common than they themselves realize or would care to admit on the record...

...He does say, however, that "the task which lies ahead of Catholic theology...

...Now back to Baum's excellent commentary on Laborem Exercens...

...In short, they can rightly be asked to be as constructively critical of capitalism as Baum is of Marxism and state socialism...

...And while shibboleths are fun to argue about, they really don't get us very far in the real world...

...Baum accurately "reflects what the document says about this matter...

...Yet Novak, for his own part, also seems to acknowledge the need to "democratize" the workplace, although I have the impression that he would gag at the word itself...

...He explicitly says more than once that the economic system proposed in the encyli-cal is definitely a form of socialism...

...Baum meets this argument head-on, and effectively so, in my opinion...

...Novak points out that Baum stresses those aspects of the encyclical which seem to encourage "collectivism" and "planning," whereas, in Novak's opinion, "the greatest single stress of the encyclical falls upon the human person, the concrete individual, the subject of human labor...

...In fact, Baum's commentary on the encyclical is, in this particular respect, the best I have seen thus far...