Catholic Vice President J.D. Vance met Pope Francis on April 20th, the day before the latter’s death. The meeting with the besieged Pope was short and did not touch on their differences in opinion about the treatment of immigrants. Earlier this year, Francis declared that a massive deportation programme would “defeat the dignity of many men and women” (“”JD Vance was the last person to meet Pope Francis.,’ Wall Street JournalApril 21, 2025). It is difficult to not share the late Pope’s concerns about this, but the bigger picture is even more interesting.
wThe Pope is known as the leftist man who advocates “social justice.” It is not immediately clear how these two individuals belong to the same church. Is that an irreconcilable difference? Casuistry was undoubtedly unable to pull some rabbits from the Pope’s tiara or the Vice President’s Maga hat. Moreover, interestingly, the two main characters were able to soften their differences by calling for something they disagree in a classic liberal political economy.
As classical liberal (and libertarian) theorists explain, the concept of social justice has only clarity in an authoritarian social system in which political rulers assign rewards and punishments to individuals in society. In a voluntary order, the authority cannot do so. Rewards and punishments are determined primarily according to impersonal factors, such as those who better meet the demands of unknown people in large markets. Other impersonal factors such as luck, accidents, and laws of physics also play a role.
To see this, we can consult with what I believe is the three major classical liberal or libertarian ideas in our time. (1) Friedrich Hayek provided a similar argument for social justice to what I just described: see him The miracle of social justiceOriginally his third volume Law, legislation, and freedom. (2) Anal coliberal or anal kyo conservative Economist and political philosopher Anthony de Jasai arrives in a similar conclusion based on the voluntary rules of conduct (as David Hume, he calls “convention”), but without state: in his work, in his work, Justice and its surroundings. (3) James Buchanan and the Faculty of Constitutional Politics and Economics will rehabilitate the state through unanimous consent (i.e., individual veto). In this contract theory, justice is unanimously accepted and certainly lies in rules that do not exist in the concept of justice imposed by political authority. The summary is available to Jeffrey Brennan and James Buchanan. Reasons for the rules. (Note that, for Buchanan, opposition to arbitrary volitional “social justice” does not mean that the state cannot provide any kind of income insurance.)
If that’s correct, we can say that both the (late) Pope and J.D. Vance believe in social justice, that is, in the political authority that assigns rewards and punishments to society as a whole, but Vance uses words other than “social justice.” The Pope believes that political authorities should support the poor at the expense of the rich around the world. JD Vance believes that the preferred group is the ones that American political power holders deserve and are obedient supporters of such rulers. Many of his tillards would have been approved by Francis if he didn’t add “Americans” to his preferred group (“”JD Vance declares “America’s first” to allow Republicans to embrace economic populism,’ Financial TimesJuly 18, 2014):
“We’re making it into women and gentlemen, Wall Street. We’re committed to working men,” he said. “We import foreign labor. We are going to fight for American citizens and their good work and their good wages,” he added. “We need leaders who are not in the pockets of big companies, but answer leaders who can’t sell out to multinationals, like workers, unions and non-unions, but who stand up to American companies and the American industry.”
In Argentina, the Pope was known by many as the “Peronist Pope” after Juan Domingo Peron, a leftist populist whose presidency contributed to the decline of Argentina. Financial Times Note (Michael Stott, “”Was Francis the first Peronist Pope?“April 23, 2025):
“Peron once said that the doctrine of Peronism was the social doctrine of the Church,” said Ignacio Zuleta, author of Francis’s study entitled Pope Peronist. Both the church and the Peronist emphasized the fight against social justice and poverty, advocating conservative social practices.
Francis style? àla Vance, “social justice” is an example of a bigger ideology. Both men are collectivist. In other words, they both support collective and political choices over personal and private choices. They support the different collective choices made by different people simply by calculating rewards and punishments for society as a whole. Vance certainly doesn’t oppose Francis. [which] Pursuing simple profits as your main goal [and] It will continue to cause serious damage”Les 10 Phrases Marquantes du Pape François: “Saint Pierre n’avait Pas de Compte en Bank”” Le MondeApril 20, 2025).
*************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The featured image in this post imagines Pope Francis and J.D. Vance arrive together at the pearly gate (the rug caused by the dents in the space-time continuum is a rug). Before St. Peter assigns a contemplative seat in heaven, the Pope is smiling and naive, while Vance is simple and angry. After all, they both believe in “social justice,” but the criteria for assigning rewards and punishments are different.
Of course, since heaven (by definition) is not rare, readers of this blog should understand that the allocation of place must be merely a ritual with no practical consequences.
Jd Vance and The Pope Meet, Chatgpt and Pierre Lemieux from Econlog
