Proponents of distributism in our time have a hard time talking about it clearly to people who aren’t already on board with their ideas. If you have muddled through the writing of any prominent modern distributist you know what I mean. But it doesn’t have to be this hard to talk about. The path to a distributist economy is plain. It’s hard — maybe even ultimately indefensible — but come on! it’s at least straight-forward.

When we talk about “to whom should we give X” (as opposed to “who will be most effectively helped by X”), we’re talking about moral frameworks and value systems. Who deserves what kind of assistance? Should desert even be a factor when giving assistance? Should need be a factor?

If you’d been born a hundred years ago, what would you have done for a living?

This a bit of a two-headed post. I’m talking about The Future of the Internet to anyone who might be interested in that. But I’m also talking about Distributism and using the internet as an illustration of distributist policy. I happen to be passionate about both things.

A core point about distributism is that it emphasizes the importance of property over enterprise. We’re seeing this exact sentiment in the growing “Indie Web” movement, which is a distributist movement without knowing it.

I’ve created an ebook version of G. K. Chesterton’s short work Outline of Sanity.

A roundup of recent writings about Distributism, which seems to be getting a much-needed, fresh round of attention.

The link (if there is one) between Hobbit Society, gift-giving as a way of life, and Distributism.

Haque has been hit on the head and is seeing double here: Growthism and Capitalism are not two different things

The differences between Capitalism and Distributism can be a bit hard to grasp. Perhaps an illustration involving the lemonade stand – that iconic symbol of the entrepreneur’s humble beginnings – can help us sketch things out. This article is part of The Wealthy Peasant, a continuing series on alternative schemes for spreading economic independence.

The man who saw through the red and the black to the white.

It’s hard to know where to begin an introduction when the subject has so many arms and legs, but the best way, I think, is to be very brief.