Economics/Class Relations

Rethinking Christian Economics

I’d like to see an economics debate between Todd and Gary North.

By Todd Lewis

Praise of Folly

his paper will attempt to deal with an often under-discussed and misunderstood extension of the principle of Christian stewardship: Economics. Modern American Christians seem to espouse, whether implicitly or explicitly, one of three views on economics: 1) Laissez-faire Capitalism; 2) “Crony” Capitalism or 3) Socialism. Each of these economic models take modern economic systems and grafts Christianity onto them. They start with something else first and then add the Bible to it rather than grounding the systems upon the Bible itself. As in all world and life issues, the Christian is ought to ask first: What does the Bible say about this matter?

This paper is not exhaustive, as I have not dealt with all the possible formulations of Christian economics. Rather, I intend to bring central ideas to the reader’s attention and attempt to organize my thoughts on a hypothetical Christian economic order. In this paper, there are three main topics that I intend to cover: 1) Usury, 2) Distrubutism, and 3) Socialism. For transparency, I would like to inform the reader that I reject the first, have a qualified support for the second, and totally reject the third.

Continue Reading

6 replies »

  1. To all the economic, social and political system of their own individual free choice, under the personal law or exterritorial autonomy options for volunteers, advocated by panarchists and polyarchists. Then for failures only the own ideas and activities can be blamed, not the the self-responsible actions of other volunteers, engaged in their systems, at their risk and expense. Tolerance for all tolerant actions. Intolerance only towards all intolerant actions! Experimental freedom or laissez faire in all spheres, always at the own risk and expense only. That is or should be tolerable for all.

    • My main interest in the area of economics stems from the observation that a repeat of the 19th century seems to be happening, where markets are becoming integrated on an unprecedented level, and with unprecedented levels of wealth and technological advancement on one hand, but with enormous polarization between social classes on the other hand, and in a way that results in reproletarianization of labor in developed countries, particularly the USA given its extremist version of neoliberal economics, the development of a 19th century model mass proletarian class in developing countries (like China), and the continued impoverishment of the underdeveloped countries.

      The general impact of globalization is that, like the Industrial Revolution, its overall and long term impact may be positive and necessary, among its highly negative side effects are wider class divisions within individual nations, and greater polarization between the developed and underdeveloped world.

      There is likely to be a backlash against this at some point in the future, as there was during the growth of capitalism and the industrial revolution in the 19th and 20th centuries. During the 20th century people started turning to statist and even totalitarian ideologies as a means of addressing difficulties associated with capitalism and industrialism, e.g. progressivism, social democracy, state socialism, state capitalism, managerialism, fascism, communism, and Nazism.

      I’m hoping that in the 21st century people will have learned the lessons of the 20th century, and instead explore the range of libertarian or decentralist alternatives.

      Like the Eurasianists, European New Right and other similar movements, I’m for moving away from a unipolar world towards a multipolar world but in a way that’s not merely about replacing US imperialism with multiple more regional imperialisms. Instead, I’m for an anti-imperialism that’s about self-determination for all, not just Europe, Russia, Latin America, etc, but also the Basques, Catalans, Chechnyans, Palestinians, Kurds, Chiapas, etc.

      Hence, my interest in the range of anarchist, libertarians, anti-statist, decentralist, anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, regionalist, separatist, and secessionist ideas.

  2. A couple of very good book reviews regarding economics by Donald Thoresen have appeared on Counter-Currents recently. I would suggest that readers who are put off by Thoresen’s and C-C’s white nationalist views suspect their instinctive revulsion and instead examine the substance of the economic arguments being presented.

Leave a Reply