Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn contemporary thought, the terms "secular" and "religious" are polar opposites. They are held to occupy separate domains. But that view is mistaken. Religious belief organizes society around fundamental ideas about ethics and existence. This article examines the way economic belief systems function as religions. Economic thought in various forms (Marxist, Keynesian, neoclassical) is brimming with implicit religious meaning. Instead of belief in an afterlife and heaven, modern economics promises heaven on earth in the form of continuous material progress. Adherents of competing economic ideologies often promote them with the energy of religious zealots. Thus, modern societies are still organized around religious principles, but they are now hidden from sight. This article shows how the religious dimension of the modern worship of economic progress is rooted in Christian theology: Calvinism in the United States and Lutheranism in the Nordic countries, which are famous for their own brand of social democracy. In recent decades, secular faith in the religion of economic progress has begun to falter. The failures of mainstream economics to warn of impending crisis has reduced its credibility, even among economists. More importantly, the rise of environmentalism as a religion has vastly increased the number of citizens who question the goal of material progress. The attack on economic religion may have also undermined the credibility of mainstream political parties, partially explaining Brexit in England and the election of Donald Trump in the United States.

Aside from the original 13 states on the Eastern seaboard, most of the land in the United States at one time belonged to the federal government -- a result of the Louisiana Purchase, the Mexican-American War, and other important events in American history. Federal policies for these lands such as the Homestead Act, the railroad land grants, and the land allocations to American Indians were among the most significant American government actions of the 19th century. The overriding policy goal was to transfer the lands out of federal ownership to private owners and to the states, both of whom received hundreds of millions of acres in total. Transferring the lands to new ownership was seen as a first step in putting them to productive use as part of the essential task of building a new nation. After this 19th-century era of disposal, the federal government shifted to a policy of retention of the lands in federal ownership around the beginning of the 20th century. It was a reflection of basic new political and economic ideas emerging in the United States during the progressive era. The progressive gospel of efficiency preached that scientific management could better serve the nations needs than the chaotic, trial-and-error processes of the free market. Like a number of other applications of progressive ideas, the public lands have failed the test of time. Management of the lands has been neither scientific nor efficient. The old progressive mission of scientific management has been strongly challenged and indeed sometimes altogether displaced by new ideas advanced by the environmental movement. Yet, the original progressive institutional forms dating back 100 years remain with us little altered. The result is an antiquated and costly system of public land management that is unsure of either its goals or methods. Adapted from the source document.