THE PRE-CAPITALIST ORDER
At the beginning of the
16th century, the Catholic Church still held sway over Europe.
Society was still pretty much seen as an integrated whole and
part of a larger cosmic order. Human interactions were seen as
connected to a higher divine order that was mediated by the moral
order of the Church.. As R.H. Tawney notes, there was "no
absolute division between the inner personal life, which is 'the
sphere of religion', and the practical interests, the external
order, to which, if some modern teachers may be trusted, religion
is irrelevant."1 Further, he states that "society was
interpreted, not as the expression of economic self-interest,
but as held together by a system of mutual, though varying, obligations."2
Urban centers like London, Amsterdam, and Lisbon were still out
of touch for those living in the countryside. Limited transport
kept economies localized and within the bounds of local social
mores. If some non-westerners can believe it, European society
once resembled the communities which may still be found but are
disappearing rapidly in the non-economized parts of the world.
Yet by the 16th century this cosmic order was showing severe strains from within and without. From within, the Church's own economic hypocrisy was all too evident. It preached a personal gospel of severe proscriptions on money lending and charging interest on loans, yet the economic excesses of the Vatican belied some inconsistency on structural matters. It appears that the Church was having fundamental difficulties adapting this personalized system of economic ethics to the emerging system of inter-regional and inter-national finance. It appeared increasingly out of date, preaching personal economic restraint to a Europe which was seeking to raise itself out of the darkness of the Middle Ages and the effects of the Black Plague which killed one-quarter of citizens.
THE MERCANTILE AND SCIENTIFIC
REVOLUTIONS
On top of its own failings,
the Church was under increasing pressure from without. The English
Agrarian Revolution of the 15th and 16th centuries was a critical
step in the breakdown of this undifferentiated social order ruled
by Catholic morality. The explosion of export trade in wool from
England and rising inflation led to the snatching up of land by
various economic interests in order to make profit off the new
industry. Public fields and forests known as "commons"
which had previously been used for collective farming and fuel
collection were fenced off and converted into pasture for sheep
grazing. Landlords pushed peasants off their land through various
underhanded means. Further, the selling off of monastic lands
by the British Crown in the wake of the Anglican revolt against
Rome unleashed a wild spate of land speculation, spiraling rents
and land prices.3 Although peasants heavily protested these developments
until the 17th century, this victory of rural depopulation and
the privatization of public lands signaled the institutionalization
of the inalienable right to private property.
As Tawney notes, this victory
marked a turn in ideology away from that of the village based
on "a fellowship of mutual aid and a partnership of service
and protection... to the pecuniary interests of a great proprietor"4
The significance of this development was that the traditional
balance of quasi-legal rights and obligations in communities began
to be replaced by a mechanistic law from without. While focusing
on individual rights, this law neglected the moral claims of the
larger community to monitor and to exact common duties from individuals.
A paramount shift is marked here in western society from society
as a blend of cooperative duties and rights mandated internally
by common consent to society as a collection of individual interests
where rights and duties are mandated from without by mechanistic
law.5 For those unfamiliar with this history, its parallels to
present land issues in the "developing" world are disturbing.
This shift away from public rights
and duties towards individual rights was deeply informed by the
Enlightenment thinkers of the 17th century and their use of scientific
rationalism towards social ends. In pre-modern society, man was
seen to be limited by the natural restraints of a cosmic order
and the moral restraints of the Church. The Enlightenment thinkers
disembedded man from this larger order and placed him within the
limited but predictable container of scientific rationalism. In
this way, man became the quantifiable sum of his appetites. In
the new ideal social order, the irrational but natural desires
and appetites of man were controlled and encased by the construction
of a rational and mechanistic state. Man was no longer viewed
as subject to the natural laws of growth and decline and the duty
to act in accord with them. Rather, his basest character was engineered
by the legal state to create the greatest good for the greatest
number. The more religious view of man was increasingly seen to
be corrupt due to the mediation of the Church and out of the bounds
of rational human discourse. There was no longer a moral admonishment
to do good for the good of the whole, but rather to pursue one's
own interests which served the good of the whole through the workings
of the state apparatus and economic order.
Such rational abstractions helped
to liberate the growing mercantile order from the confines of
local and place centered morality. The "market" had
literally been a place, where economic interactions took place.
In such a confined place, normally socially unacceptable forms
of behavior were allowed in the pursuit of profit and good business.
Acting in one's own interests, competitive behavior, the subordination
of personal relationships, and anonymity were acceptable in the
market where "people become pure individuals just as commodities
are pure things."6 Being so place centered, the market was
under the bounds of the larger community, and when individuals
left it, they came under the normal communal rules of each individual
society. With the Enlightenment thinkers' rational abstraction
of man as the sum of individual appetites and of society as state,
the market, too, became disembedded from the confines of its particular
place. Free to grow on its own terms, its rules and methods soon
came to dominate that which it had been previously subordinated
to, namely the religious, moral and cultural. The new pillars
of modern society emerged as the universal truths of the individual,
the state and the market.
The ramifications of this new order were to create not only a revolution in material production but also a violent attack on the human spirit and social culture. Some historians have linked the shock of the Black Plague in 1348 and the subsequent preoccupation with physical security as the energy behind the mercantile and scientific revolutions.7 It is Descartes, master of the rational, who said,"The main source of fear is surprise." It is not surprising, then, that the revolution of scientific thinking sought to cut out the element of surprise in the irrational and to shift value away from the subjective and qualitative to the objective and quantitative. Society was thus transformed into state; market as place into market as principle, nature into environment, and man into a quantifiable aggregate of needs and desires. In each of these areas,
the search for general laws implies concentrating attention on a minimum of elements which are common to the overwhelming variety of settings. The appreciation of a particular community loses importance. Moreover, these elements and their relationships have to be measurable; the quantitative analysis of mass, volume, temperature and the like replaced the qualitative interpretation of an ensemble's unity and order.8
In each of these areas, this quantification
implies the creation of a mechanistic apparatus to perform the
task of measuring and regulating the new macro reality. As this
mechanism is based on the macro abstraction of quantity and not
on the qualitative diversity of each particular locale, the general
effect of the system on its parts is to streamline and homogenize.
In terms of society, power and rule had previously been derived
from the quasi-religious authority of the monarch and the hierarchical
order of personal relationships and duties which flowed down to
the peasant. In the modern rational system, power has been derived
from the rational and scientific power of the abstract state.
In this system, the individual accedes a certain amount of social
power for the freedom of individual rights and the freedom to
pursue desires provided by the market. The more the individual
retreats into his/her own private pursuits, the more the state
is granted the power to ensure the support of basic needs and
to protect the individual from the desires of other such individuals.9
The development of the state mechanism fueled the creation of
modern society in which individuals and communities have been
relieved of the social roles and obligations they once traditionally
managed on their own terms.
This rise of the state as provider
of services and protection has been seen as one of the great accomplishments
of modern statecraft which has enabled man to enjoy greater personal
freedom. However, as man has been relegated to a set of physical
and emotional needs and these former social obligations have been
taken over by an expanding state bureaucracy, the individual has
become more distanced from the self-sufficiency of group and community
problem solving. Through becoming more free as individuals, man
has actually become more cut off from traditional support networks
and communities which required roles of service but which also
provided support in more direct and personal ways.
The modern state encapsulates
a whole labyrinth of alienating and disabling bureaucratic structures.
Whereas learning had taken place in the practical, hands-on and
personal relationship of apprenticeship, it has now transformed
into education which requires a massive, standardized system for
learning quantitative facts and figures. Whereas health had been
"the autonomous ability to cope with the environment"
and encapsulated a variety of knowledge both preventative and
curative, it has know transformed into a massive system of dependency
on overcrowded medical services, expensive medicines and the quantitative
approach of health as a purely physical phenomenon.10 Whereas
housing and public works had been a form of community endeavor
and solidarity, they have transformed into massive public works
systems which often go against a communities well-being in the
flooding of whole regions by dam construction or the destruction
of local environment by road projects designed for the greater
good. Whereas nature had been the larger creative and destructive
force that each person was deeply a part of, it has been transformed
into environment to be molded, used and managed in the perpetual
service of our appetites. Whereas personal tragedies in health,
death or material well-being had been supported by local community,
people have become free to be dependent on costly insurance systems
which often find loopholes in support.
The breakdown of the market as a place and the unleashing of its energies and values into society at large furthered this transformation of western society. The mechanistic quantifier in the market is money. Traditionally, value had been seen as not only the quantifiable exchange rate of an object but also more qualitative worth like a person's skills and abilities. There had always been a wide variety of subjective meanings for value from the pretty (precious stone) to the useful (a carpenter's skill). When one traded and bartered, there was a qualitative exchange occurring as well as an quantitative one. As the state came to mediate relations between individuals, money came to mediate relations between goods and services. Money as such became a homogenizing force in transforming all value into an objective quantification. Similarly, whether in socialism or liberal democracy, the state has homogenized the individual into a faceless quantity of "equal" citizens. Hence, the precious stone becomes equal to three weeks of the carpenter's skilled work and the varieties of class, religion and ethnicity are disregarded. Since any other form of value can be quantified into a specific amount of money, money then becomes the highest form of value and subsequently power in its being the benchmark for all other forms. Similarly since any individual can be quantified as a single unit citizen, the state as the sum total of these citizens becomes the benchmark for the well-being of all individuals. Beginning in the 16th century particularly in England and Holland and then reaching its full extent in the early 19th century, the price marking making system transformed both products and factors of production into commodities, or objects of value quantifiable by money.11 During this same time, the state arose to assemble the varied peoples of Europe into homogenized blocs of nationalities such as German, Italian, French, English and Russian.
THE REFORMATION
Yet a full hundred years
or more before these Enlightenment ideas took root, another major
force against this communitarian order ruled by Catholicism arose
from within the Church. The Reformation was a movement by religious
people, who as with the Enlightenment thinkers, disliked the Church's
mediation of the individual's communion with God and who could
no longer tolerate the hypocrisy and anachronism of the Church.
With the development of a number of new competing Protestant world
views, Europe could never again hold a unified spiritual vision
of society.
It is important to note here that at the beginning of the Reformation,
Protestantism did not offer a new carte blanche attitude
towards individual involvement in economic matters. On the contrary,
the two great Reformation leaders, Luther (1483-1546) and Calvin
(1509-1564), sought newer and purer forms of this Christian cosmic
order which they felt had fallen into ruin under the Catholic
Church.
During the initial stages of the
Reformation, religious commentary on social and economic ethics
continued to develop.
Luther's vision was romantic in that he sought a return to a divine
past before the institutions of man had destroyed the ability
of the individual to find his own divine union with God. In his
desire to see a return to a simpler agrarian order based on individual
asceticism and commitment to God, he attacked the institutions
of the Church. He sought to break down all social barriers between
ordained and lay, barriers that separated the individual from
communion with God. For Luther, the Bible and one's conscience
were all that was needed.
The tragedy of Luther's new theology
was that by breaking down Church authority he helped bring forth
a flowering of vast viewpoints which got further away from his
romantic vision of a unified pre-modern society. Further, with
the breakdown of the Church, the standards for the social moral
order became increasingly mediated by the state. The religious
justification for breaking down the Church fed into the hands
of the Enlightenment thinkers who also desired the end of religious
involvement in social mechanics. Yet Luther certainly would not
have been pleased at the replacement of the Church with the modern
state's engineering of human appetites as the basis of social
order.
In Calvin, we also see a theology which when compromised by the external developments of the time helped to support the foundation of the modern economic state. Originally, Calvin, like Luther, had a vision of a purer, unified social order in which all human activity came under the guidance of divine law. However, unlike Luther and the Catholic Church, Calvinism sought to deal with the social realities of the time and to respond to the burgeoning economic class of the new economic order. Calvinism accepted the new role of business as a legitimate aspect of human endeavor. As Tawney notes, "Its enemy was not the accumulation of riches, but their misuse for the purposes of self-indulgence or ostentation."12 In this way, Calvinism attempted to reunite the increasingly alienated spheres of economy and religion. It gave moral sanction to the freer movement of the market principle as in tune with the times, yet still attempted to keep the market's most destructive tendencies under tight control. The new business man's activities were never for himself but always sublimated to a religious ideal that his work was to manifest devotion to God through selfless diligence. This original vision spoke more of a collective identity of followers under a communal order with rights and responsibilities than the free market individualism that later Calvinism is associated with. This theology established Calvinism as the new faith of the urban traders and merchants of northern Europe.
THE PURITANS13
Puritanism represented a deepening of this fusion of the Christian
and economic spirits. At its root, it held the Protestant ethic
espoused by both Luther and Calvin that good works are not a viable
method towards gaining God's grace and ultimate salvation. Emerging
from Calvin's interpretation of the Protestant idea of pre-destination,
Puritanism held that one's ultimate salvation is already pre-figured
at birth. With such a contingency, life then becomes a trial of
faith in discovering and manifesting one's destiny as one of the
chosen or one of the damned.
Certain individuals he (God) chose as his elect, predestined to salvation from eternity by 'his gratuitous mercy, totally irrespective of human merit'; the remainder have been consigned to eternal damnation, 'by a just and irreprehensible, but incomprehensible, judgment'14......... That aim is not personal salvation, but the glorification of God, to be sought, not by prayer alone, but by action - the sanctification of the world by strife and labor.15
The result of such a world view
created a group of followers described as "an earnest, zealous,
godly generation, scorning delights, punctual in labor, constant
in prayer, thrifty and thriving" and believing "that
labor and industry is their duty towards God."16 Further
they were economically independent, educated and having "a
certain decent pride in their status, revealed at once in their
determination to live their own lives, ...and in a somewhat arrogant
contempt for those who, either through weakness of character or
through economic helplessness were less resolute, less vigorous
and masterful, than themselves."17
In short, the Puritan vision was
perfectly suited to the new individualistic economic order emerging
in the 17th century. As part of the initial Protestant urge, Puritanism
sought to end any external mediation between a person and God.
Yet "the moral self-sufficiency of the Puritan nerved his
will, but it corroded his sense of social solidarity." The
Puritan as an individual and as a collective group saw the rest
of the world as hostile in striving towards their religious vision.
Further, the constant endeavor towards proving one's already determined
salvation led the Puritan to view failure and poverty as manifestations
of damnation. This not only set up a competitive instinct among
those in the group through fear of failure, but also intimated
one to be "moved less by compassion for his erring brethren
than by impatient indignation at the blindness of others."18
In sum, we can see how Puritanism more deeply fused a Christian
vision with the market principles of competition, self-interest
and financial success.
The critical development of this world view of the Puritan was the movement within their Church by the Independents. In keeping with this sensibility to remove all mediation between the individual and God, the Independents deeply disliked the whole ecclesiastical structure of the Church. They sought to achieve their moral and social vision through political construction rather than relying on the apparatus of the Church. This led to the further marginalization of Church structures and of the Church as an arbiter of social morality.19 As another step away from Luther and Calvin's vision of religion as the guide for social morality, Puritanism helped to further pave the way for the free movement of the economic individual within the mechanical state.
CAPITALIST SOCIETY
What we see by the 18th
century and the opening of the Industrial Revolution is a social
order being rationalized and mechanized by the universal abstractions
of the Enlightenment's social scientists. The new religion was
science, a complete epistemology unchallengeable in its rational
certainty. The Enlightenment's rationalization of man drove the
subjective and spiritual underground and the religious and moral
out of the public sphere into the private. Christianity and spirituality
in general had very little role in this new world. The state,
the market and even man as public figure himself were mechanistic
creations, and Christianity's role was relegated to supporting
this order through an increasingly personal and private morality
to individuals with no need for social guidance. The Puritan and
Protestant spirit of the Netherlands and England was the perfect
ethic for this age.
It might not be a far stretch
to say that the dominant values of this society had not been seen
elsewhere in the history of civilization. Competition, individualism,
shunning of public duties, disdain for the poor, quantity over
quality, such values have usually been subordinated to parts of
society where they could serve a function and remain harmless
to the greater good. In order for these values to be unleashed
into the larger societies of Europe, not only was a functional
endorsement of them needed, as in scientific rationalism. A subjective
and moral sanction was also needed, and underneath the science
of these social structures lies a number of subjective, moral
and spiritual positions.
Firstly, Puritanism's spiritual
individualism found a good partner in the Enlightenment reconfiguration
of human nature as the free reign of appetites. This new human
nature and the Puritan sense of individual action and responsibility
aided the development of the theory of individual rights such
as the right of private property. This endorsement of individuality
from both the Church and from the Enlightenment theorists sanctioned
the breakdown of local communities which were seen as an impediment
to the free pursuit of individual appetites and the market values
of individualistic competition and anonymity. This support further
ensconced the state as the guarantor of these appetites through
legal rights and as the administrator of duties through state
services.20
Secondly, the unique blending
of belief in pre-destination and market values formed a competitive
angst to prove one's sanctification amidst the mass of unsanctified
souls through economic advancement. A result of this competitive
drive and the quantification of man's nature is that the conception
of the poor and poverty underwent a dramatic change. In pre-capitalist
Europe, poverty was a qualitative state of some diversity as opposed
to a pure lack of economic means. It could mean not only the beggar,
but someone of respectable status who had fallen upon misfortune
or still, a renunciate having freed themselves from material attachments.
In turn, the well off had a duty to attend to the poor as a means
for their own spiritual advancement. This value is seen in the
biblical phrase,"It is easier for a camel to pass through
the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of
God."21 However, with the spread of market principles and
the quantification of well-being through scientific rationalism,
poverty became a single abstraction, a negative lack of economic
value. Further, with the depopulation of the countryside and the
massive pauperization of people in cities, poverty lost its local
face and became a mass entity not only unworthy of compassion
but a scourge to mankind.22 This conception fit well into the
Puritan ethic where the poor are seen as failures, undeserving
of compassion and receiving the just results of their sins. This
creates a sense of social stratification between the "chosen"
affluent and the "unchosen" poor. As society became
more economized, capitalist style social classes were formed loaded
with this subliminal valuation.
Thirdly, this new industrial world
needed a new social ethic to realize the construction of a market
state able to satisfy personal desires. The famous "Protestant
work ethic" became just the ideological tool for this construction.
The Puritan's method of communion with God was the disciplined
carrying out of his business and life's work. Subsumed into the
new epistemology of scientific rationalism, the religious sense
served as the moral grounds for the engineering of a citizenry
through schooling into the new behavioral patterns needed for
industrial capitalist culture. 23 The poor had been transformed
from souls with a deeper connection to God than the rich in the
Medieval period to just recipients of their sinful station in
the Enlightenment period. By the 19th century, with religion increasingly
marginalized, poverty lost its active spiritual elements. This
element once sublimated provided the negative evaluation needed
to rationalize the exploitation of their labor for economic ends.
The new conscious sense of the poor as evil was not because of
their sinfulness or being "unchosen", but because of
their disregard for the proper values of economic society such
as hard work, discipline, order and neatness.24 Consequently,
all had to be indoctrinated into these values. This called for
proper "education" and of course the proper role of
the state and business (the representatives of the market) in
society. From this standpoint, it is not difficult to understand
the moral basis of the capitalist owner's exploitation of his
employed laborers. With a sublimated sense of the worker being
"unchosen" and a conscious sense of him being less than
cultured, the excesses of the industrial revolution in miserable
working conditions and the use of child labor can be seen as sacrifices
for the betterment of the worker and society.
Marx, of course, critiqued this
quantification and subsequent alienation of man himself. Marx's
critique is of interest because he points to the deeper spiritual
dislocation of man in this economization process.25 Marx made
the following analogy to religion in explaining this alienation,
"Every self-estrangement of man from himself and from nature
appears in the relation in which he places himself and nature
to men other than and differentiated from himself. For this reason
religious self-estrangement necessarily appears in the relationship
of the layman to the priest, or again to a mediator..."26
Yet this is not an analogy but the direct situation. As European
religious sensibilities became increasingly subsumed within the
epistemology of the science, the market and the state, Calvin's
ideal of material gain in the service of spiritual communion became
consciously forgotten. The endeavor for material gain thus
became spiritual communion itself. In religious terms, the capitalist
acts as a mediator or priest between the laborer and God/his own
individuation, which is the achievement of material success for
the capitalist, of the full humanization of man for Marx, or of
direct communion with God for Calvin.
Thus it is interesting to note that the original impetus of Luther
and Calvin to end the spiritual alienation or estrangement of
the masses by the Catholic Church's mediation was in turn twisted
into another form of alienation perpetrated in the name of the
God of economic wealth. This is perhaps an even crueler form of
alienation in that it incorporates both the spiritual and material.
Ultimately, as further seen in Sakyamuni's rejection of Brahman
priests as mediators of the divine, it appears that the desire
to control others through mediating the divine is a common feature
of humankind.
THE RISE OF MODERN IDENTITY
In summary, when the Protestant
spirit with its mission to return to a purer social and divine
order merged with the mercantile energies of the 16th century,
the Puritan ethic was born. This ethic was further warped with
its accommodation to Enlightenment norms and with its marginalization
in daily life. What emerged by the Industrial Revolution was a
subordinated religious ethic and a new common ethic called capitalism.
The conclusion to be drawn then is that capitalism despite all
its claims to be based in "rationalistic" social science
also contains quite strong and subjective value orientations of
questionable spiritual content. As David Loy writes:
If market capitalism does operate according to economic laws as natural as those of physics or chemistry -- if economics were a genuine science -- its consequences seem unavoidable, despite the fact that they have led to extreme social inequality and are leading to environmental catastrophe. Yet there is nothing inevitable about our economic relationships. That misunderstanding is precisely what needs to be addressed......Far from being inevitable, this economic system is one historically conditioned way of organizing/reorganizing the world; it is a world view, with ontology and ethics, in competition with other understandings of what the world is and how we should live it.27
Thus Loy concludes that capitalism
has become the dominant "religion" of the modern world,
especially after the defeat of its lesser brother in economy,
communism. Loy further emphasizes that the underpinnings of capitalism
have become the primary way in which we learn "what the world
is and what our role in the world is."
In this world of expanding free markets and consumer choice, our identities are at stake, since this view of what the world is and our role in it forms the foundation of our identity as humans. Identity can be defined as "the unity and persistence of personality" or "the unity or individual comprehensives of life or character".28 As we have seen in Medieval England, and still today in some societies far from the free market fray, identity is constructed through association and connection within an undifferentiated model of the world as part of a larger cosmic order. All of man's endeavors fit into this cosmic order through a balance of direct duties and obligations which connect him those directly around him, "through a fellowship of mutual aid and a partnership of service and protection". Yet, as we have seen, the scientific and economic revolutions broke down this unified model of the cosmos. While the differentiation of science and economy from religion and culture allowed each sphere to further develop on its own terms, it eventually led to an extreme alienation of these spheres from each other.29 As such, the connections which had held together communities and individuals themselves broke down, so that one could say people of our modern age lack true identity in which character is unified. With the commodification and alienation of man from nature, his livelihood, his fellow humans and himself, modern man is chopped into constituent parts and forms multiple and often distinct sub-identities. There is the self that works which differs from the self that plays or the self that must cooperate with his fellow worker to get the job done yet also must compete with him for his daily sustenance. As we will see, this splintered identity has been deepened over the last hundred years with the rise of consumerism, the theology of capitalism.
NOTES:
1. Tawney, R.H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (New
York: Penguin Books, 1938/1984) 33.
2. Tawney, 37.
3. Tawney, 144-45.
4. Tawney, 153.
5. Tawney, 151-53.
6. Berthoud, Gerald, "Market" in The Development
Dictionary: A Guide to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs
(London: Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 74-77.
7. Legner, A, ed. Die Parler und der schšne Stil, 1350-1400
(Cologne: Ein Handbuch zur Ausstellung des SchnŸtigen-Museums,
1978) 73.
8. Sachs, Wolfgang, "Environment" in The Development
Dictionary: A Guide to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs
(London: Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 31.
9. de Tocqueville, Alexis, Democracy in America, Vol. II,
ed. Philips Bradley (NYC: Alfred A Knopf, 1946) 289-96.
10. Esteva, Gustavo, "Development" in The Development
Dictionary: A Guide to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs
(London: Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 20.
11. Berthoud, Gerald, "Market" in The Development
Dictionary: A Guide to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs
(London: Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 77.
12. Tawney, 114.
13. Max Weber's analysis of the Puritan movement as the basis
for the growth of modern capitalism is legendary. See his The
Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1958) R. H. Tawney's deepening of this analysis
also expands on a number of important points to Weber's original
thesis. The following analysis is based on their original conceptions.
14. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans
J. Allen, 1838, vol.ii, 128-29.
15. Tawney, 117.
16. Tawney, 211.
17. Tawney, 202.
18. Tawney, 229.
19. Tawney, 218.
20 Nandy, Ashis, "State" in The Development Dictionary:
A Guide to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs (London:
Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 265-66.
21 Matthew 19:24, The Revised English Bible (London: Oxford
University Press 1989).
22 Gronemeyer, Marianne, "Helping" & Rahnema, Majid,
"Poverty" in The Development Dictionary: A Guide
to Power as Knowledge, ed Wolfgang Sachs (London: Zed Books
Ltd., 1992) 55-56 & 159.
23. Gronemeyer, "Helping", 57-58.
24. Tawney notes the influence of the severity of Puritan morality
on the development of Utilitarian logic, especially that of James
Mill, 242. Further, various sources site the influence of Puritan
notables on political and economic society, especially in the
policies of the Dutch West India Company.
25. Marx, however, did not make a radical enough break with the
scientific rationality which forms the whole basis of this process.
His belief in linear progress through history and his fetishizing
of labor and economy kept him within this alienated paradigm of
scientific rationalism. In turn, communism became a state run
form of social engineering and homogenization as opposed to capitalism
which uses the market. see Cleaver, Harry, "Socialism"
in The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Power as Knowledge,
ed Wolfgang Sachs (London: Zed Books Ltd., 1992) 231-49.
26. Marx, Karl, "Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of
1844" in The Marx-Engels Reader, 2nd Edition, ed.
Robert C. Tucker (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1978),
78.
27. Loy, David, "The Religion Of The Market", Journal
of the American Academy Of Religion, Summer 1997.
28. Webster's 3rd New International Dictionary of the English
Language, Unabridged, Philip Babcock Gove, Ed. in chief (Springfield,
Mass: G & C Merriam Co., 1961) 2662.
29. Ken Wilbur develops this thesis of the differrentiation and
dissociation of social spheres in the modern age in Wilbur, Ken,
The Marriage of Sense and Soul: Integrating Science and Religion
(New York: Radom House, 1998).