According to distributism, the ownership of the means of production should be spread as widely as possible among the general populace, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism) or a few large businesses or wealthy private individuals (laissez-faire capitalism).
It sounds like they want a stock market, but don't understand that it already exists. Their view on capitalism seems misplaced, and should be on crony capitalism. The stock market allows millions of people to buy bits of ownership of the means of production of all sorts of companies.
Distributism puts great emphasis on the principle of subsidiarity. This principle holds that no larger unit (whether social, economic, or political) should perform a function which can be performed by a smaller unit. ... Thus, any activity of production (which distributism holds to be the most important part of any economy) ought to be performed by the smallest possible unit.
This ignores the fact that people can become quite skilled in one thing, allowing them to do it
better, faster and cheaper than other people can. As I read through this it became clear to me that it would force people back to the
lowest level of economic activity, the one
necessary to survive, food production. We would
all end up being farmers. As people have to take care of building and creating every little thing themselves, the
loss in productivity would cause a
loss in
standard of living. There is a
reason why
factories make more
money than
small farms.
Distributism promotes a society of artisans and culture.
This again loses many of the aspects that allow people to increase their standard of living, as costs for basic goods necessarily rise, reducing money that
can be spent on
other things.
Essentially, distributism distinguishes itself by its distribution of property (not to be confused with redistribution of wealth).
Theft required right there. There is also the issue that it is a
scarce resource and there is a constant addition to the human population. Today you would have 10 acres, next year maybe you have 8. You would constantly have less and less to live on. Cities would probably just fall apart too.
Distributism sees the family of two parents and their child or children as the central and primary social unit of human ordering and the principal unit of a functioning distributist society and civilization. ... The economic system of a society should therefore be focused primarily on the flourishing of the family unit, ... Distributism reflects this doctrine most evidently by promoting the family, rather than the individual, as the basic type of owner; that is, distributism seeks to ensure that most families, rather than most individuals, will be owners of productive property. The family is, then, vitally important to the very core of distributist thought.
This can cause massive problems. Not every family is harmonious and functional. There is also an issue of
demographics. Natural populations are not a perfect 50/50 mix of gender. Males are born more often than females. In areas that are peaceful you end up with quite a large excess of single males. In war torn areas the opposite occurs. It also ignores individuals preferences that may not include children or their vision of a family unit.
