This article has left out any mention of the devastation that the decline of the traditional family, divorce, abortion, the spread of homosexuality and freedom without responsibility have wracked upon our economy.  It's fine to say that plutocracy is dead wrong.  But the aforementioned issues have an immense effect on the economy.  Broken families are an economic disaster, especially for women and children, as is single motherhood.  Abortion is being used as a contraceptive, and on account of it respect for human life has dramatically declined - babies born in public bathrooms are left in toilets!  The homosexual lifestyle that is the polar opposite of a traditional family focused on sacrifice by both spouses for each other and for their children now has adherents who demand that they receive all the economic benefits of heteroxexual married couples, whereas homosexual unions cannot produce children who are offspring of both parties, and where there is a natural inclination to make said sacrifice. Freedom is demanded by people who refuse to use it responsibly.  The US has an SSI program that is egregiously abused by parents who don't want their children to work, because it would deprive the parents of a monthly check!  All this is directly related to our economy, and that is what George Weigel et al are trying to say. In order to counter plutocracy we need a sane democracy, not the one we have in which the proven traditions of the past 2000 years are trampled on and manipulated by impostors.  The timeframe of the past 30 years that is used in this article is parallel to that in which the referenced moral decline took place. 

Yes, there are political solutions to the decline of democracy in the USA.  They hinge on taking back our country from the fringe groups who have ruled via judicial, rather than legislative fiat.  Only then will we be secure enough to counter plutocracy.

The downturn did not start in 2008 - it began long before that and well before 9-11. The plutocracy is already in power and control and is systematically draining our fortunes and spirits. In 2008, Bush and his treasury secretary, Paulson finally confessed to the country that we had crashed into the ditch. There were many early warning signs that were specifically ignored. The collapse was no more accidental than a suicide jump from a tall building. Mr Bush and his companions slunk away from Washington leaving a turbid mess that will take a generation to overcome.

@Patricia McCarron: I find your naming "the spread of homosexuality" as one of the causes for a societal decline you lament to be offensive, uncharitable, and patently untrue. With a broad brush you so blithely denigrate the millions of loving, committed relationships that God's gay and lesbian sons and daughters have formed for centuries; relationships which only recently are beginning to receive the societal recognition and support they deserve. All of us -- including those of us whom God created gay or lesbian -- are created in the image and likeness of God.  Yet, instead of recognizing this fundamental truth of theological anthropology, American bishops fight with every fiber of their being legislative efforts to recognize the loving, stable and committed relationships LGBT people form.

Where, one might ask, are the episcopal voices raised to proclaim the principles of Catholic economic and social justice Mr. Cochran identifies? They are too busy saying that gay people can't adopt children in need of a loving home, or that gay people are "intrinsically disordered" and therefore society shouldn't be surprised when violence is perpetrated upon them. Such rubbish would be funny if it weren't so dangerous.

No straight, married couple has ever had their marriage harmed by the loving, committed relationship of a gay couple. To lay the blame of the decline of the "traditional family" or a high divorce rate of straight couples at the feet of gay people is preposterous.  And, as far children being a requirement for marriage, if two straight people who are beyond the age of bearing children are allowed to get married (for, in the language of Catholic theology, "the good of the spouses"), why can a gay couple not enjoy the same rights and blessings of marriage?

Believe what you will, Ms. McCarron, but please keep your hate-filled lies to yourself and let God's LGBT children live the lives God' created us to live.

"Again and again, church teaching explicitly calls for the “redistribution” of wealth, and demands that government action show what John Paul II calls a “preference for the poor” by maintaining a safety net to protect the most vulnerable against poverty, homelessness, hunger, and poor access to health."
Does the writer propose that we no longer consider the Tenth Commandment "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods" in the rush to confiscate the neighbor's wealth for the "redistribution" theology. Is this simply  another name for 'liberation theology" using taxation rather than a gun? When will the Catholic leaders recognize that the Church is among the wealthy and many world leaders, President Obama, Hugo Chavez among the top, two have no respect for religions especially the Catholic Church and could easily call for the redistribution of its holdings, an auction at the Vatican Museum? 
The seven practices of charity toward our neighbor, based on Christ's prophecy of the Last Judgment (Matthew 25:35), that will determine each person's, not presidents, politicians,  nor government bureaucrats, final destiny was taught us from the Baltimore Catechism:
    1.     Feed the hungry
    2.     Give drink to the thirsty
    3.     Clothe the naked
    4.     Shelter the homeless
    5.     Visit the sick
    6.     Visit those in prison
    7.     Bury the dead
For those who claim that Jesus was a big-government socialist provider with regard to helping those in need and reducing individuals personal responsibility to only "Love the Neighbor' and replacing it with government programs is a misreading of His message. Jesus Christ made the point "to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's" with no guidelines as to how the Romans were to spend the tax monies.  
"For you will have the poor always with you" Matthew 26.11 and nowhere in the New
Testament does Jesus Christ lay the responsibility for caring for the poor, the sick the hungry or thirsty, the homeless or any oppressed people on any governmental body. He did not cite King Herod, the priests of the temple, the local politicians or the Roman powers as the source of Charity. He made it an individual responsibility time after time in His sermons, in His parables and in His own acts. The Good Samaritan was not an example of "Love thy neighbor" because he stopped at the inn to make a 911 call but because he acted, providing aid, comfort and financial assistance to his neighbor. Jesus Christ's teachings cannot be used be used to support states becoming the major or only source of charitable acts.

Is it the role of government to be the essential and probably soon the only source of Charity as the Obama administration and other presidential candidates offer plans to reduce the tax credits for charitable contributions for those who provide the most: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/the-war-on-philanthropy-15190

This would have a serious impact on the financial ability of all religious affiliated charities to carry out their good works.
When does confiscatory tax rates in the guise of 'redistribution for the common good' on wage earners who already provide 90%+ of all incomes tax revenues become a challenge to the ability of religious and non-government charitable organizations to carry out their own charitable functions? 47 percent of all wage earners pay no income tax and are already recipients of considerable welfare in the guise of tax credits and the untold number of government programs, both federal and State. It appears that the Catholic Church and other religious groups do not even recognize that Obama plans to reduce or eliminate religious organizations and non-government groups, from their historic roles and replace them with socialistic government run programs.
All one need do is to observe the complete and total failure of total government control in communist and socialist countries of caring for their poor. Why any thinking person would advocate inflicting government as the major or sole giver of help to our poor is beyond belief.

E. Patrick Mosman

Thank you for bringing us David Carroll Cochran's article, "Plutocracy or Democracy."

It is a wonderful, long-needed centering piece on Gospel principles, Church social justice teaching, and American politics.  It's a busy article-- the necessity for good government, for good governments' regulation of free-markets, for redistribution of vast disparities in wealth, the importance of work and the right of workers to organize, a preference for the poor and an application the poetic principle to specific action-- almost every sentence is a hammer for justice. 

We can only hope that our bishops read it, and are converted.

Terrance R. Kelly
Denver, Colorado

I’m just a simple man. I don’t have a degree in Politics and I’m certainly not a Theologian. I admit I look to those I admire to guide me through the thickets of deep analysis in these topics. COMMONWEAL has been a place where I hoped to find such mentors. But David Carroll Cochran simply makes me angry. His paean to European Socialism (Plutocracy or Democracy? 2/10/2012) has caused me to question this trust.

Scripture tells us to be charitable. We should embrace justice. But where are we urged to empower government to supplant our personal responsibility to charity and justice? Is it religion or politics that Mr. Cochran invokes when he tells us “all persons must have access to sufficient goods…”? (So, we should leave our doors open at night?) And we need government regulation to prevent ‘scandalous speculation in the financial sector’; and markets ‘must be appropriately controlled by the forces of society (So police power should be employed?). ‘Equality of economic well-being’ (equal outcomes), ‘redistribution of wealth’ (Extort from the rich.), ‘all people deserve the opportunity…’ (But who must give it?) Are these values biblical? Show me!

And my favorite; Catholic doctrine’ is violated by any attempt to ‘limit the freedom or negotiating capacity of unions.’ But how can anyone deny that the essence of ‘labor unions’ is to limit freedom of workers as well as employers? This is not Catholic doctrine, but social political philosophy espoused by European Popes.)

Just three graphs of this rubbish and I’ve thrown this issue against the wall. Yet I know that Mr. Cochran echoes the Popes JPII and Benedict XVI. But what American Catholic feels that these Vatican hierarchs have the faith or welfare of American Catholics at heart? We’ve seen what they’ve done to our liturgy by imposing literal Latin translations that wouldn’t rate a C+ in an academic setting (And why is Latin the standard, anyway? Are Maronites less Catholic?). We’ve seen how the papacy has labeled clerical child abuse as an American problem, treating the Cardinal-offender, Bernard Law, as an honored refugee from American justice. Should we be surprised that their politics are just as anti-American?

What does surprise me is COMMONWEAL’s acceptance of socialism, a political economy that has failed wherever it has been tried, from the first Jerusalem church, to the Mayflower Compact, to Greece, as something to be espoused by all good, church-going Catholics.

I’d say, “Cancel my subscription”, but I can’t wait for the next installment touting some inane, already failed, political social policy (Russian communism, perhaps) as Catholic doctrine.

Re: E. Patrick Mossman's assertion: "47 percent of all wage earners pay no income tax and are already recipients of considerable welfare in the guise of tax credits and the untold number of government programs, both federal and State."  

This is a canard.

As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities recently noted on 04.11.2012:

Close to half of U.S. households currently do not owe federal income tax.  The Urban Institute-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that 46 percent of households will owe no federal income tax for 2011.

These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay.  As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes.  Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.  In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent.  This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items.

Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers.  (In years like the last few, this group also includes a significant number of people who have been unemployed the entire year and cannot find work.)

Robert Stewart, subscriber

One of the most thoughtful and descriptive articles concerning the problems of the current United States.  Ancient Rome finally failed because those with the wealth ran everything to protect themselves.  Our industry has become dependent on war production orders to provide jobs.  I do not object to taxes to car for others, but I do object to taxes gobbled by wars where we have no business, and which run up the deficit since they are "outside" the budget.  If Jesus commented "The poor you will always have with you" he was warning us that we must always worry about them.  And he also had some serious words about rich people and difficulties of getting to heaven.  To some rich people their weath preservation is more important than the poor.  Remember Jesus was not content with the Golden Rule "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."  And he said the young man who commented he tried to "Love your neighbor as yourself" as near the kingdom of Heaven.  What Jesus did say was "Love one another the way I have loved you."  And as scripture noted he said that knowing who he was and what he was to undergo.  Such a frightening command because there is no way we can actually set a limit to what we must do for others.  Jesus certainly had no limit.  So, rich guys, don't hoard your riches.  The Good Lord himself said that in the long run it really won't be worth it.