Editor's Introduction: Religion and the Shaping of Normative Economics

• Date: 01 March 2019
• Author: Clifford W. Cobb
• Published date: 01 March 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12274

Editor’s Introduction: Religion and the

Shaping of Normative Economics

By Clifford W. Cobb

Introduction: E conomics as a Religion

The economic theory that is taught in school is supposed to be value

free or value neutral. Yet, its equilibrium orientation gives it a conser-

vative bias. Economics also imparts a conservative bias by upholding

the validity of property rights, despite the fact that practically every

plot of land on earth was at some point in the past obtained through

force or fraud. The bias against consideration of historical antecedents

clears the air for mathematical analysis, but it clouds understanding

of the actual meaning of asymmetric exchange, private asset accu-

mulation, and exercise of power via investment decisions. Another

analytic bias is found in the separation of the market from the politics

by which the rules of the market are made. At every step, economic

theory promotes fragmented thinking and a tendency toward market

fundamentalism. Indeed, the market fundamentalism that pervades

textbooks is the clearest indication that economics students are actu-

ally being indoctrinated by a secular catechism.

Economics has many of the characteristics of a religion, and thus

it might reasonably be deemed as much a religion as a science.1

That

means the dominant form of economics has no legitimate claim to

universal truth. Instead, there are multiple forms of economic religion.

The dominant form of economics, which posits that its driving force is

free choice by autonomous individuals, is a global religion in the guise

of technical analysis. It offers a secular version of paradise: the fulfill-

ment of each individual’s desires within budget constraints. Economic

growth and technological innovation are the twin deities that offer

universal salvation in the form of personal prosperity. The validity

of material wealth as an ultimate value or deity is rarely discussed

explicitly because it is sacred—not subject to question or debate. All

of the suffering that occurs in the world in the name of “economic

development” is justified by statistics that show rising incomes. Thus,

American Jour nal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 78, No. 2 (March , 2019).

DOI: 10 .1111/ajes.122 74

© 2019 American Journa l of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

298 The American Journal of Economics and Sociology

as is common in many religions, the element of sacrifice plays a large

role. Although some people and nations are sacrificed on the altar

of progress, the mantra of economics is that the future is filled with

bright possibilities.

For two centuries, two competing economic religions have vied for

adherents. The one named “capitalism” or “free enterprise” promised

an unending flow of material possessions to those who could com-

pete and innovate successfully. The one called communism or social-

ism offered prosperity to everyone in a planned economy controlled

by workers. Each of them partially fulfilled those promises, enough to

sustain vast armies of believers. Even now, those are the two primary

options in the religious contests of the 21st century. But opinion polls

show wavering support for each of them, depending on how the

basic terms are understood. The fundamentalist versions of those two

“faiths” have tarnished their reputations with excessive claims about

their virtues and an unwillingness to recognize their weaknesses.

As a result of growing doubts about the blessings of both capital-

ism and socialism, there is growing interest in alternatives. Among

the alternatives that are gaining currency is renewed interest in the

practices that have historically been characterized as “religions.” In

Eastern and Central Europe, for example, during the two decades after

the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the embrace of private enterprise

was almost universal. But by 2017, conventional religious identity had

eclipsed faith in free markets. In Russia, only 37 percent of the pop-

ulation self-identified as Orthodox Christians in 1991, but by 2015,

that share jumped to 71 percent. In the Ukraine, traditional belief

rose from 39 to 78 percent of the population (Lipka and Sahgal 2017).

There are indications that other nations have undergone a similar

transformation.

None of these changes came as a surprise to Robert Nelson, author

of the lead article in this issue. He describes how economics grad-

ually displaced older forms of religion for the past century, but he

also recognized signs of a reversal in recent years. He referred to the

ideologies that played that role as “secular religions” or “implicit reli-

gions.” Economic ideologies are the foremost type of secular religion,

but nationalism and environmentalism are also implicit religions with

increasing numbers of adherents.