Our chances of making a real societal change toward distributism within our life time seem small at best, so why bother with the effort of trying to promote a view unknown to most people and misunderstood by many who have heard of it?
Even the founders of distributism knew that there was little chance to bring about real change during their lives. Here we are, one hundred yeas later, fighting the same uphill battle. I occasionally get asked why I bother.
I’m sure that Nigel Farage and the UK Independence Party (UKIP) heard the same thing over the last twenty years. As a U.S. citizen, I’m obviously not a member of UKIP, and I don’t agree with all of its positions (after all, they aren’t distributists), but I find UKIP to be a source of encouragement in regard to the distributist movement. Scoffed at as a fringe group by the three major parties, UKIP has become a force to be reckoned even though they still have a long way to go. The headlines after the recent UK elections say it all.
The point is that a “fringe” group of “upstarts” who are routinely dismissed by “those who know best” can make a difference. However, they can only do so if they persist. This, dear readers, is the lesson UKIP offers to the distributist movement.
Do you want your local government to change? Do you want higher levels of government to stop interfering with local issues? Do you want a more friendly environment for local business where you live? Whatever you would like to see change in society, it won’t happen unless someone tries to promote that change, unless those who agree with the change take up the call and spread the word. Distributism will never be given a chance by others if we do not share it with them. It won’t be considered as a solution to our ongoing economic problems, or even a viable alternate view of economics, if we don’t persist in the face of criticism and apparent lack of progress.
Well said, and the Populist Party in the UK is probably the link between UKIP and Distributist thinking….