http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1402306.htm
Anyone interested in this, I think its interesting that they said they dont have the vocabulary to engage with economists, they use scholarly language that's sure but they dont have the same priorities, questions as to whether or not economics, or particular economic and political ideologies such as libertarianism and neo-liberalism, is idolatrous dont matter outside of believers (sometimes to believers too).
The idea of erronious autonomy is interesting to me too because its the basic criticism of protestantism in its widest/cultural or sociological sense or modernism.
On the other hand I wouldnt or couldnt class this as a progressivist critique of economy, most of the progressivist critiques endorse the values of libertarianism and neo-liberalism they just suggest that they are superficially realised or a pretext for class struggles or false consciousness, appealing fantasies etc. This is an explicit rejection of those values.
It makes me think of the institutional economics or "socialism of the chair" which informs some of the traditionalist thinking about the economy in the Rhineland version of capitalism in Germany and central europe, its a conservative economic model but very different from the Washington consensus version of conservatism. It is what I see some of the political reconfiguration globally, at least in the UK, in the UK the labour party has tried to reposition itself as a "one nation conservatism" party, this could be a ploy because of the popularity of conservatism, or that much of the surviving critique of capitalism is cultural or culturally conservative.
So the poll positions of neo-liberal vs. traditionalist conservatism could be the new political divide, what do you think and what do you think of this article? Do moralists have any role in assessment of the economy.
Anyone interested in this, I think its interesting that they said they dont have the vocabulary to engage with economists, they use scholarly language that's sure but they dont have the same priorities, questions as to whether or not economics, or particular economic and political ideologies such as libertarianism and neo-liberalism, is idolatrous dont matter outside of believers (sometimes to believers too).
The idea of erronious autonomy is interesting to me too because its the basic criticism of protestantism in its widest/cultural or sociological sense or modernism.
On the other hand I wouldnt or couldnt class this as a progressivist critique of economy, most of the progressivist critiques endorse the values of libertarianism and neo-liberalism they just suggest that they are superficially realised or a pretext for class struggles or false consciousness, appealing fantasies etc. This is an explicit rejection of those values.
It makes me think of the institutional economics or "socialism of the chair" which informs some of the traditionalist thinking about the economy in the Rhineland version of capitalism in Germany and central europe, its a conservative economic model but very different from the Washington consensus version of conservatism. It is what I see some of the political reconfiguration globally, at least in the UK, in the UK the labour party has tried to reposition itself as a "one nation conservatism" party, this could be a ploy because of the popularity of conservatism, or that much of the surviving critique of capitalism is cultural or culturally conservative.
So the poll positions of neo-liberal vs. traditionalist conservatism could be the new political divide, what do you think and what do you think of this article? Do moralists have any role in assessment of the economy.
