The View From 1776

Scientific Materialism and the Socialist Religion

There is no necessary causality between science and the collectivized, socialistic politic state.  But that’s the way it has worked out since the mid-19th century.

Read Delusions Of Scientific Adequacy by Dan Peterson.

See also Socialism: Our Unconstitutionally Established National Religion, What Is Liberalism?, and Can Science Survive Scientism?.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 08/26 at 06:17 PM
  1. One thing that Richard Dawkins pointed out in his book "The God Delusion" is that religion is a poor basis on which to develop sustaining economic policy. He goes on to rightly argue that economics based on religious beliefs makes for poor economic theory and inefficient economic activity. What makes religion economically inefficient is that it does not deal with practicalities but mainly with faith. A proof of this in found in Bush's faith based mentality which has proven to be disastrous for the U.S. economy. God can't guide an economy. Only men of reason can, something that religion lacks.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/29  at  03:17 PM
  2. 'Men of reason'.. can't guide an economy only individuals freely pursuing their self-interest within a context of morality can offer guidance. Faith based morality as a matter of fact. Socialism or rationalsim are as much faiths as any although they are ultimately dependant on coercion using the police power of the state rather than the freely chosen self-coercion taught by religion. Ordered liberty is inconcievable absent the faith based morality spoken of by the founding generation.

    Dawkins speaks about things which have never existed. Morality is based on religion rather than economics. Moral individuals are the basis of sound economies because they permit minimal government and maximum liberty while rescuing the masses from your 'men of reason'.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/30  at  06:09 PM
  3. Morality is definitely based on religion. But it is materialism and economics that gives morality reality and its foundation. Religion gives morality its theory. But it is economics that gives morality its philosophy and its practicality.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/31  at  10:03 AM
  4. America was right to pick its fundamental religion as economic freedom. Classic religion was too divisive, ideological and segregationist to foment the American dream. Other religions are now a footnote and a handmaiden to economic materialism.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/31  at  11:33 AM
  5. No. You have it exactly backwards. Religious sentiment supports morality and rightly guided self-interest. State connected churches are no more, thankfully, but the basis of morality is still religion rather than politics and theoretical materialism. The basis of America's 'fundamental religion', as you put it, is not economic freedom but the Judeo-Christian concept of the natural law from which economic freedom and ordered liberty are derived.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/31  at  12:40 PM
  6. I don't recall seeing much about balance of trade issues, monetary policy, or banking regulations in the Bible.

    Mr. Airth is correct that you can't base an economic system on an injunction that we should all just be "honest and moral." Honesty and morality are necessary, but not sufficient.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/31  at  09:17 PM
  7. Silly comment. Look at the historical record. Compare statist economic systems with systems based on citizens capable of self-government. That all human beings have interests is a given. Markets control those interests by keeping them within limits defined by success and failure. States have no restrictions inherent to free markets since the coercive power is rightly placed in the hands of the state where success or failure in a marketplace is not a factor. The only sign of success in a bureaucratic/administrative state is the broadening of it's power in it's own interests. In order for a poltical/economic system to remain free it must be guided by a moral people. Morality is based on the religious sentiment of the people. The only interest to benefit from irreligion is the state. Government is a necessary social institution but it is an expense to the productive sector and should be limited as should all costs to productivity.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/01  at  11:01 AM
  8. Well, at least we have limited the role of religion in the market place. It is a secular market in which all can participate despite their religion. I can remember when in the fifties Jews were denied equal oppertunities with corporations.

    It is extraordinary how government has grown in the last eight years. That growth happened under an administration that wanted to increase the role of religion in government. It has been an ironic twist, though, for an administration that wanted to decrease the role of government in everyday life. But instead the religious factor did bring with it an increase in incompetence, inefficiency and corruption to this administration which, ironically, had to be offset with an increase in government.

    These past few years should prove that religious ideology has no place in universal governance because of the backwardness and inefficiency it brings to running a nation.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/01  at  11:47 AM
  9. Yes and I remember when catholics were discriminated against. Anti-catholic legislation was common not too many years ago. So what? You guys should address the points raised and get over your foolish bigotry. Why should the concept of seperation of church and state only apply to religious metaphysical belief systems intrinsic to the historical development of western culture when it was meant to apply to establishments of religion only? (i.e. organized churches) Modern liberalism is no less a faith based system as is atheism. Preventing their 'establishment' as the nation's religion is a worthy goal.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/01  at  12:44 PM
  10. Tom C.

    We have very good examples of what happens when you mix religion with government - you get a theocracy. Prime examples of theocratic states include the Taliban (Afghanistan) and Iran, not exactly paragons of economic vitality.

    Canada, Australia, New Zealand and about 20 other countries are now entirely free of a state religion. Many of these countries took, to some extent, our wonderful, non-religious constitution, as a model for theirs.

    I sense you believe that by imposing your religious beliefs on others, that somehow that will improve the performance of the market and of government.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/01  at  09:22 PM
  11. Pat- Don't put words in my mouth. No one on the 'right' is talking about imposing anything religious on anybody. I can contribute to a church of my choosing only if I freely choose to contribute. I have no choice when it comes to the socialist faith. The only impositions placed upon free people in this country comes from the left. What color is the sky in your world?
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/05  at  01:51 PM
  12. Only Judeo-Christian principles define the human creature accurately. Not man-made religion or man-made secular philosophy.

    All Western Civilization is based upon the Judeo-Christian definition of human as earth's Choicemaker. You lefties can't make that square with your need for self-justification, collectivist leftism, dodging individual responsibility, and personal value.

    What do you admit is the source of your criteria - if any? Hmmm?

    "No one is smarter than their criteria." Small wonder...
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  12/30  at  01:34 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.