An Argument for Distributism
A conservative alternative to capitalism and socialism.
Neoliberal economics, championed in the United Kingdom by Margaret Thatcher and later exacerbated under Tony Blair, has left an indelible mark on the nation. This economic philosophy, rooted in the principles of individual freedom and minimal government intervention, has, unfortunately, led to a host of detrimental consequences for the British people. The history of neoliberalism in the UK is marked by a fervent embrace of free-market policies, privatization, and a retreat from the welfare state. The initial promises of economic prosperity and individual empowerment have given way to a stark reality of increased poverty, rising unemployment, and a significant deterioration in income distribution.
The repercussions of neoliberalism are glaring in Britain's socio-economic landscape. The concentration of wealth in the hands of a few has led to a power imbalance that permeates every facet of society. The state, originally conceived as a neutral arbiter, has become a tool to safeguard the interests of an increasingly exclusive capitalist class. Wage contracts, once a symbol of fair exchange, have morphed into agreements that favor the employers, leaving workers with little choice but to accept unfavorable terms to avoid the specter of starvation. This moral erosion within capitalism is compounded by insecurities for both workers and capitalists. Jobs are no longer secure, wages diminish in old age and sickness, and the very system designed to promote economic stability becomes a source of volatility.
The alternative to this neoliberal quagmire lies in the principles of Distributism, a theory crafted by Hilaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton. Distributism posits that widespread ownership of the means of production is crucial, countering the concentration of wealth seen in capitalism and the centralization inherent in socialism. Embracing Distributism is not just an economic choice; it is a move towards stability, justice, and a more equitable society. Interestingly, Distributism aligns seamlessly with conservative values, offering a genuine alternative to the current economic order that resonates with the principles of conservatism.
Conservatism, at its core, seeks to preserve the traditions and institutions that have proven to be the bedrock of society. Distributism fits snugly within this framework, as it promotes a return to a more decentralized and community-oriented economic structure. Unlike the extremes of capitalism and socialism, Distributism advocates for a "proprietary state," where property ownership is widespread, preventing the undue concentration of power in the hands of a few. This resonates with conservative ideals of individual responsibility, self-reliance, and a society where everyone has a stake in the common good.
Distributism, while rooted in historical principles, is not a nostalgic yearning for a bygone era. It offers a practical solution to the challenges posed by both capitalism and socialism. The theory contends that there are only three stable solutions to the inherent instabilities of capitalism: slavery, socialism, or widespread ownership of property. Given the moral and historical constraints, slavery is untenable, leaving only socialism or distributism as viable options. Belloc argues that socialism, in practice, tends to devolve into increased regulation, benefiting both corporate interests and socialist reformers, resulting in what he terms the "servile state." Distributism, therefore, emerges as the preferable alternative, steering clear of the pitfalls of excessive regulation and centralization.
The evolution of capitalism into a servile state is already underway, with both "socialist" Europe and "capitalist" America showing similarities in bureaucratic organization and social welfare systems. This convergence has not been a result of conspiracy but a response to the inherent instability of capitalism. The Keynesian economic model, adopted to stabilize capitalism, redistributes income rather than property, further blurring the lines between distributism and its alternatives. However, as the costs of government escalate beyond society's ability to support them, and corporate interests seek to externalize social costs, the Keynesian system finds itself in a precarious position, echoing the warnings articulated by Belloc.
Distributism's economic foundation is rooted in the Aristotelian distinction between distributive justice and corrective justice. While neoclassical economists believe in the automatic achievement of distributive justice through market equilibrium, Distributists contend that true equity is dependent on the distribution of the means of production. This distinction is crucial, as Distributism prioritizes equity over equilibrium, recognizing that the two are intricately linked.
In conclusion, the conservative perspective in Britain should seriously consider Distributism as a viable alternative to the neoliberalism that has wreaked havoc on the nation. Distributism, with its emphasis on widespread ownership, aligns seamlessly with conservative values of individual responsibility, community, and the preservation of societal traditions. It provides a practical solution to the pitfalls of both capitalism and socialism, offering a path towards economic stability, justice, and a more equitable society. As the Keynesian system faces uncertainty and the shortcomings of neoliberalism become increasingly apparent, the time is ripe for Britain to explore the possibilities that Distributism presents for a more prosperous and just future.