A fresh consideration of socialism
is happening these days. Two remarkable presidential campaigns by Sen. Bernie
Sanders and perhaps a more significant Congressional campaign by Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have put socialism into public discussion. During
Covid 19, serious questions about public health and welfare have additionally
opened a door to socialism’s approaches.
Like capitalism,
there are several definitions of socialism and a variety of ideas and
personalities associated with it. The merits of capitalism are usually measured
in practical terms; particularly by quarterly stocks values. Socialism, by
contrast, tends toward the theoretical and seems to thrive on argumentative
factions accounting for several brands of socialism. It might surprise some
people to learn that among its threads there is a substantial body of religious
socialism.
Let’s begin with
Michael Harrington (1928-1989). He launched Democratic Socialist Organizing
Committee in 1973. Since a 1982 merger, it is known as Democratic Socialists of
America. Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders are among its members.
Harrington was a
journalist, a well-regarded author, a live-in volunteer at a homeless shelter,
a government advisor, a public lecturer, briefly a juvenile caseworker and an
occasional teacher. He was raised Catholic and educated in Jesuit schools. He
knew his faith and took it seriously… until that is he gave up on Catholicism
based on his understanding of some doctrines. This turn occurred gradually but
was decisive nonetheless. Harrington maintained a love of the church, its
rituals, its saints and of course the gospel. But Harrington was firm in his
renunciation of his faith. During his final months of cancer his closest
relative and a friend, Sr. Peggy FitzGibbon, RC, tried unsuccessfully to coax
him back to Christianity.
Subsequent columns
will consider Harrington’s religious struggle and his abiding Catholic
sensibility. Other future columns will consider other socialists; those who
kept to their faith, including serious Catholics, a movement in the Anglican
church and more. For now, a few sentences on Harrington’s famous book, The
Other America: Poverty in the United States (Scribner [1962]; $17).
The Other
America is not a book about socialism. In fact, its topic was somewhat a
departure for Harrington. The book was influential because it is not strident.
In fact, except for statistics it reads well today. Its themes are still with
us.
Upon reading The
Other America President John Kennedy (1917-1963) was motivated to give
prominence to anti-poverty measures. (Historians think Kennedy actually read a
review in The New Yorker; not the entire book.) After Kennedy’s
murder, President Lyndon Johnson (1908-1973) launched a War on Poverty to honor
Kennedy. Johnson appointed Sarge Shriver (1915-2011) as the director of that
effort. Shriver, in turn, drew upon The Other America and put
Harrington on his team for awhile.
The Other
America popularized a term, culture of poverty. It soon enough
became quite controversial. Harrington’s point was that a cluster of variables
are usually present among the poor: inadequate housing, unhealthy nutrition,
lower educational attainment, incidence of juvenile delinquency, scarce job
opportunities, below average rate of membership in unions, vibrant churches,
civic clubs and the like. It does little good to address one symptom of the
problem, Harrington said. A single health clinic in a neighborhood, for
example, is a noble gesture. But it will not make a dent in poverty without
other simultaneous interventions. The failure is “not individual and personal,”
he writes. Poverty is not solved by exhortations directed at the unfortunate.
Poverty “is a social product.” Its manifestations are “not the biographies of
unlucky individuals.” They are “the effects of an environment.”
After the book
received wide readership, neo-conservatives came forward with the old story of
rugged individualism. The poor are at fault for their plight, the argument
goes. They have low aspirations; their moral system is deficient. This is
because they don't try hard enough. They are living the fate they deserve.
Government anti-poverty efforts are thus a waste of money. The
neo-conservatives have been so influential that now using the term culture
of poverty is a guarantee for rebuke.
Droel edits INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a newsletter
about faith and work.