Dr Rowan Williams's red rag to the capitalist bulls

archbishop cranmer

Marx is a curious exemplar for a church, as he sought to replace the Hegelian dialectic of the spirit with a materialistic dialectic located within the economic sphere. For Marx, the inadequacies of society were to be overcome by a transition from capitalism to Socialism and ultimately to Communism.

Perhaps the Archbishop of Canterbury has failed to notice that in recent decades Socialism has become a spent force and Communism has been thoroughly discredited. Perhaps, like orthodox Marxists, Dr Williams will blame the imperfection of leaders for the non-arrival of his Utopia, but he would be something of an expert in that.

It is difficult (as ever) to fathom what the Archbishop is proposing, for his advocacy of the Marxist ideal and the repudiation of capitalism can only be accomplished through the diminution of democracy, or, what Marx oxymorincally called ‘democratic centralisation’. In fulfillment of the pattern of society set out by Plato in 'The Republic', the ultimate authority has to be intellectuals and experts – the Philosopher Rulers – and this paves the way for bureacratic authoritarianism. At best (if it be), this may be seen in the form of ‘democratic centralisation’ of the European Union. At worst, it is that of Stalin and Lenin.

Capitalism can be cruel, but so is nature. It is a manifest inconsistency for the Church of England in one week to apologise to the man who expounded a theory of survival of the fittest, and the next to denounce such a theory when it is manifest in the natural laws of economy and society. Exploitation is an undoubted evil, but this ‘extremism’ is not a capitalist necessity, but a result of the greed in the heart of man. And the Archbishop ought to know that one cannot change the human heart through legislation or external imposition.

Democracy has its imperfections, and so does capitalism. But both have been found by experience to be the better than the alternatives, and both yield a more just and less oppressed society. The ‘Protestant ethic’ identified by Weber is both rational and moral, and the history of the modern era attests to this. Marxism has failed along with the barbarities of fascism, and history attests to this also.

Cranmer hears the Archbishop of Canterbury is presently making a pilgrimage to Lourdes, and speaking at the shrine to the ‘Immaculate Conception’. It is time for him to follow the man who appointed him to Canterbury, and to take his pro-EU, anti-State, anti-individualist, Marxist, federalist, Socialist, ‘third way’ Catholic-ecumenism to another place. He belongs elsewhere.

The Huntsman

These two precious Prelates cannot even run their Church successfully (by comparison the Labour Party seems positively united), and frankly, given their singular unworldliness, their relevance and influence is not exactly what it was.

Besides, what outstanding qualifications and expertise in this field do they bring to the table that demand we pay attention to them?

Nicholas

Archbishop Cranmer's response is considered and adroit but I fear it will be wasted on chumps like Williams and the other idiots who still live in the daydream world of socialist ideology. No doubt the recent market turmoil will give a hefty push to the Left for those already so inclined and Williams has added his penchant for socialist politics to the bleating. In his role he should be a-political and concerned only with the spiritual well-being of England.

Expect more red tape, more bureaucracy, more nannyism in the wake of this push. All of which will stifle rather than invigorate the economy. Whether these fools will be able to recreate in full Honicker's East German regime in England's green and pleasant land before 2010 remains to be seen, but so far they have done a pretty good job of it.

David Bouvier

He is not the only controversialist is he Mr D'Ancona, since the actual quote is that Marx was "right about little else" other than one behavioural observation:

"Marx long ago observed the way in which unbridled capitalism became a kind of mythology, ascribing reality, power and agency to things that had no life in themselves; he was right about that, if about little else."

But the people who make this error are not the practitioners in the city, who are aware of the market-making process, the counter-parties, settlement procedures and the rest of it."

Indeed the worst offenders are oh, the ranting Marxists.

And the greatest example of a human creation that has been mythologised and ascribed independent reality would be God.

Mark

Pathetic, ignorant crap.
The victims in Trollope, to whom His Grace refers, guaranteed the obligations of their friends. Typically the friend was an abysmally poor credit risk and has only been able to borrow on exorbitant terms. Sub-sub-prime.
Loan sharks such as those in Trollpe have been subject to statutory control for years.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with the present situation.
An individual or couple who have borrowed to buy a house are contractually bound to comply with the terms of their loan. That is a matter between them and their mortgagee.
The mortgagee may have bundled up their loan with many others and sold the whole bundle to someone else. But this has no impact on the terms of the loan.
The borrowers are not caught up in the problems of thsoe who have dealt in derivatives of which their loan forms a tiny part. Their obligations remain unchanged.
And, of course, this is millions of miles away from short selling.
I wonder if Rowan Williams has ever had a mortgage?
Or any common sense?

Tim Worstall

It's not idolatry, for a start. It's reification.

Even the theology is wrong, let alone the economics (which really rather annoys. Capitalism and markets are not the same thing at all).

Will Rees

Great! The meltdown turns theological.
I can't wait to here what Imams in Saudi, Singapore et al think about the notion of State intervention to bale out commercial money lenders.

Dan O'Brien

I would have thought the most obviously successful economic system is the undemocratic capitalism as practised in China .Isn't China run by the Communist party ? Who said communism is dead ? its simply outsmarted its enemy

Nick Kaplan

The Archbishop’s criticism is in some ways quite amusing at it just exposes his (like the rest of the left’s) ignorance about why we on the right support Capitalism. Most right wingers are empiricists. We believe in the evidence of what we observe rather than the abstract principles that are the domain of the left. The right does not idolise capitalism because of its emotional appeal but because time and time again it has been shown to work far more efficiently than any alternative. Instead it is the leftists who live in the warped world of ideological dogmatism. They are the ones who have turned Capitalism into an idol, it just happens to be the idol of their hatred. This is what the left just cannot get their head around. When problems occur in the Capitalist system the pragmatic and empirical right understand that changes can and should be made (one can and should fix what is broke). The left on the other hand think that we, like them, are dogmatists and thus they believe that such a financial shock should undermine our ‘faith’. But unlike the left we do not have a whole system of thinking that can be upset but a single incident that doesn’t fit our ideological framework. Notice it is the right that knows we will weather this storm (as we have weather greater crises) whilst it is the left that believe this crisis calls for an overhaul of a generation western thinking.

Tiberius

If Rowan is trying to suggest, even if only by implication, that "idolatry" (the breaking of the second commandment) is not present under a Marxist regime, he is patently wrong. The opportunity to worship material gain is still there, but restricted moreso to the Party elite.

It is odd that a man of the Church should find Marx an authority on anything in view of his utterings on religion. But Rowan does seem to warm to threats to his parish. I think he goes a little too far in turning the other cheek.

I really wish Michael Nazir-Ali was head of the Church.

I was impressed by Bush's speech on this. He recognized moral hazard, but spelt out quite well that we are in very deep water, which justifies state intervention.

Man_on_Richmond_Bridge

People who don't buy their own home with their own money shouldn't throw stupid comments around about things they don't understand.

And anyway how does a man who walks around in a dress all day have the experience to comment on the real world.

Christopher

Why do the leaders of an organisation that I thought existed solely to discuss the pros and cons of being gay feel competent to speak on matters concerning economic policy?

Mark

Dan O'Brien:
(1) Let's see where the experiment in China ends. And the last time I looked they weren't holding property in common. China is non-democratic rather than communist.
(2) I'm sure that Rowan is against poisoning children with toxic milk.

Elf

Religion, opium of the masses?

Max Kaye (back in 4th form)

Rowan Williams is a verbal suicide bomber whose target is the Anglican Church.

He does make me laugh, though. He'd be much better looking dressed a druid (I understand, however, that the Druids are more rigorous about upholding the tenants of their faith).

Max Kaye

Apologies for the sloppy writing: tenets not tenants. Mea maxima culpa.