NYTimes | Hardest
to accept, though, is the moral premise implied throughout the
encyclical: that the only legitimate human relationships are based on
compassion, harmony and love, and that arrangements based on
self-interest and competition are inherently destructive.
The
pope has a section on work in the encyclical. The section’s heroes are
St. Francis of Assisi and monks — emblems of selfless love who seek to
return, the pope says, to a state of “original innocence.”
He
is relentlessly negative, on the other hand, when describing
institutions in which people compete for political power or economic
gain. At one point he links self-interest with violence. He comes out
against technological advances that will improve productivity by
replacing human work. He specifically condemns market-based mechanisms
to solve environmental problems, even though these cap-and-trade
programs are up and running in places like California.
Moral
realists, including Catholic ones, should be able to worship and
emulate a God of perfect love and still appreciate systems, like
democracy and capitalism, that harness self-interest. But Francis
doesn’t seem to have practical strategies for a fallen world. He
neglects the obvious truth that the qualities that do harm can often,
when carefully directed, do enormous good. Within marriage, lust can
lead to childbearing. Within a regulated market, greed can lead to
entrepreneurship and economic innovation. Within a constitution, the
desire for fame can lead to political greatness.
You
would never know from the encyclical that we are living through the
greatest reduction in poverty in human history. A raw and rugged
capitalism in Asia has led, ironically, to a great expansion of the
middle class and great gains in human dignity.
You
would never know that in many parts of the world, like the United
States, the rivers and skies are getting cleaner. The race for riches,
ironically, produces the wealth that can be used to clean the
environment.
A few years ago, a team of researchers led by Daniel Esty of Yale looked at the environmental health of 150 countries.
The nations with higher income per capita had better environmental
ratings. As countries get richer they invest to tackle environmental
problems that directly kill human beings (though they don’t necessarily
tackle problems that despoil the natural commons).
You
would never suspect, from this encyclical, that over the last decade,
one of the most castigated industries has, ironically, produced some of
the most important economic and environmental gains. I’m talking of
course about fracking.
There
was recently a vogue for polemical antifracking documentaries like
“Gasland” that purport to show that fracking is causing flammable tap
water and other horrors.
