Introduction: Catholic Social Thought vs. the Economy of Exclusion

• Date: 01 September 2019
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12296

Introduction: Catholic Social Thought vs.

the Economy of Exclusion

By Charles M. a. Clark*

Pope Francis (2013: §53) has emphatically stated his views on the way

the modern world economy effectively treats some people as less than

human:

No to an economy of exclusion. Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not

kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today

we also have to say “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and

inequality. Such an economy kills.

The articles in this issue are a response to and reflection on Pope

Francis’s harsh attack and condemnation of the current economic sys-

tem. In this introduction, we will first discuss why exclusion matters.

Second, we will look at the relationship between theology and eco-

nomics. Finally, we will give an overview of the articles in this issue,

showing how each contribution relates to the theme of the economy

of exclusion.

Why Exclusion Matters

In many ways the argument against exclusion is part of the origin

story from which modern economic theory arose. Modern economics

is typically dated as starting with Adam Smith’s ([1776] 1976) Inquiry

into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.1

One of the major

themes of The Wealth of Nations is Smith’s attack on the mercantil-

ist ideas and policies that dominated 18th-century economic policy.

Mercantilism is a system that used exclusion to give preferences to

companies and traders based on 1) nationality (to keep gold and

silver from leaving the country) and 2) political connections (by

which businesses were granted trading charters and monopolies).

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 78, No. 4 (September, 2019).

DOI: 10.1111/ajes.12296

© 2019 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

*Senior Fellow, Vincentian Center for Church and Society. Research Fellow, Center for

Global Business Stewardship. Professor of Economics, Tobin College of Business, St.

John’s University (NY). Email: clarkc@stjohns.edu

850 The American Journal of Economics and Sociology

Smith argued that such polices created artificial inequalities, trans-

ferring wealth from consumers and workers to merchants and the

state. Furthermore, these artificial barriers to participation hampered

innovation, as they prevented others from competing, keeping out

new ideas and production methods. Smith uses slavery as an extreme

example of an exclusionary institution that harms the overall eco-

nomic health of the community. Smith and other Enlightenment think-

ers argued that replacing private charters with free markets, which

Smith called the “society of perfect liberty,” would lead to greater

prosperity. He defined prosperity in terms of rising living standards for

the average person. This same argument is made by those who argue

for less government involvement in the economy and society.

The Industrial Revolution did not actually produce the greater

equality Smith expected. Instead, inequality soared. Free markets did

not end poverty. That task was achieved through collective action

by citizens who pushed the state to promote their interests. After

prolonged pressure for reform, government policies were enacted to

reduce the harsher aspects of laissez-faire capitalism. Initially, rules

governing working conditions (including child labor laws) were ad-

opted. Eventually, the welfare state was established to provide a mini-

mum level of social protection. Government policy to protect workers

led to even higher levels of economic growth and efficiency. State

action was necessary to remove barriers to participation and to create

supporting institutions to promote participation, starting with univer-

sal education and healthcare (two very significant barriers to partic-

ipation). It might seem, then, that governments routinely serve the

interests of the common people. Yet more often than not, govern-

ments represented owners over workers. New protections for busi-

nesses and owners were created, providing new forms of exclusion.

The role of exclusion in creating and perpetuating poverty and

inequality is a major theme in Catholic social thought, which is the

tradition to which Pope Francis is contributing. We can see this view

on exclusion and inclusion in the following statement to the United

Nations by Archbishop Francis A. Chullikatt (2013):

Poverty constitutes a vicious circle of which exclusion is both its cause

and consequence. Poverty results from people and communities being