That sounds really good. Will have to see if I can get my far more technologically savvy spouse to figure out how to make that happen.
You know I did try requesting Chesterton from the library but that didn’t pan out. So I’m in a quandary wondering if I would really read it or not if I bought a copy. I mean, he is witty as all get out but it is hard to beat getting your life observations in story form great characters. Not that Chesterton doesn’t sound like quite the character. But the theology would likely feel like a bit of trudge, sometimes interesting - but certainly not up there with a good novel.
If I sound obsessed, I’ve spent most of my life looking for knowledge in prose form and now I feel like someone stumbling onto an oasis not realizing how thirsty he had been. I’ll probably be hanging out near the water for a while yet.
It’s actually called “distributism”. The best exposition of it comes from his book The Outline of Sanity. In essence, Chesterton objected to large concentrations of wealth/capital/power. He says,
There is less difference than many suppose between the ideal Socialist system, in which the big businesses are run by the State, and the present Capitalist system, in which the State is run by the big businesses. - Illustrated London News, Oct 27, 1928
Chesterton was a strong supporter of private property, and believed that property should be held privately by as many people as possible. When it concentrates, those who hold it use it against those who do not.
I really like the idea of distributism. I’m not sure how one would get to it, or how one would make it work if one did. GKC doesn’t bother himself with such practical details… But his friend Hillaire Belloc did.
GKC’s writing is all in the public domain, and most of it is readily available for free. I justified the cost of my first Kindle that way… So much fantastic literature would be conveniently available, at a fraction of the cost. A lovely soul named Patricia contributed a significant number of well-formatted ebooks on the mobileread forums. (That’s not all of them on that page, either… you have to keep clicking “next”.) Patricia has since passed, but I greatly appreciate her efforts. I have a great many of them, and can convert them to whatever formats you are likely to to be able to read.
If you wanted something in print, a great “just one thing” would be In Defense of Sanity, a collection of the best GKC essays assembled by probably three of the greatest living authorities on Chesterton. Now, this is nonfiction. If what you want is fiction… well… the Father Brown detective stories are possibly his best fiction. Honestly, novels are (in my opinion) Chesterton’s weakest form. They start out fun, and they’re packed with amusing bits and insights, but they tend to meander. Also, I don’t think Chesterton was terribly good at endings. Personally, I suspect he got bored or distracted and had to wind them up quickly so Frances could finally send them off to the editor so Gilbert could get paid.
For some mad reason in this mad world of ours the things about which men differ most are exactly the things about which they must be got to agree. Men can agree on the fact that the earth goes round the sun. But then it simply does not matter a dump whether the earth goes around the sun or the Pleiades. But men cannot agree about morals; sex, property, individual rights, fixity of contracts, patriotism, suicide, public habits of health – these are exactly the things that men tend to fight about. And these are exactly the things that must be settled somehow, and settled on strict principles. Study each of them, and you will find each of them works back certainly to a philosophy, probably to a religion. Every Society has to act upon dogmas, and dogmas are exactly those things that are most disputable. It puts a man in prison for the dogma of the sanctity of human life. All punishment is religious persecution. - Illustrated London News, March 16, 1907
I think Chesterton would be utterly against such an idea. The scientific establishment of Chesterton’s day had all sorts of public health initiatives, including purifying the species through proper breeding and sterilizing the poor and “feeble-minded”. He knew very well how the wealthy and powerful use science and “public health” to impose their own social change on others, and he often was (justifiably, IMO) skeptical of their claims. In Heretics, he says, “Science in the modern world has many uses; its chief use, however, is to provide long words to cover the errors of the rich.” He points out that the tip-off is how often the “public health” measures don’t affect the wealthy and powerful as much as they affect everyone else. I think the hypocrisy surrounding COVID-19 health measures should provoke some raised eyebrows and maybe even a little suspicion. Unfortunately, in these days, absolutely no issue is beyond aggressive politicization (is that even a word?).
I don’t know what GKC would make of COVID-19. He lived (and worked) through the Spanish Flu epidemic (he died in 1936), but I can’t recall having read a single word from him about it even though the Spanish Flu was far more devastating than COVID-19 has been thus far. Maybe that in itself is significant.
(For the record, I wear a mask when I’m going to be in close proximity to others. It creates no hardship for me, and might protect others. Then again, I grew up in Asia where such a thing was simply good manners. I would do it even if I weren’t commanded to by a bureaucrat, but I don’t think ill of others who dislike being commanded by bureaucrats. Perhaps if we didn’t turn good manners into an act of political flag-waving, more people would be willing to be more mannerly.)
No, Christians do have it pretty cushy in the west. I haven’t been threatened with beheading for being a Christian recently. The worst thing that happens to me is people think I’m weird, which people think anyways.
