What do you think?
Rate this book
Пуританските икономически експерименти
По-голямата част от материала в тази малка книжка първоначално се появява в една серия от три статии в"The Freenman"през пролетта на 1974 г. Върху същия материал авторът пише и своята докторска дисертация -"Възгледът за собствеността в пуританска Нова Англия, 1630-1720."Книгата дава коментари и върху капиталния труд на Макс Вебер за протестантската прагматичност, издаден и на български. Читателят, който сериозно се интересува от изследването на богословските или икономическите въпроси, които исторически обуславят развитието на Западния културно-икономически модел, ще навлязат в нови ретроспекции за размисъл.
Д-р Гари Норт е автор на повече от тридесет влиятелни книги по икономика и богословие. На български е издадена книгата му Безусловна капитулация. Той е президент на"Institute for Christian Economics"и редактор на инвестиционния бюлетин"Remnant Review". Живее в източен Тексас със съпругата си и четирите си деца.
Д-р Гари Норт е автор на повече от тридесет влиятелни книги по икономика и богословие. На български е издадена книгата му Безусловна капитулация. Той е президент на"Institute for Christian Economics"и редактор на инвестиционния бюлетин"Remnant Review". Живее в източен Тексас със съпругата си и четирите си деца.
64 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1989
About the author
Gary North
175 books97 followersGary North received his Ph.D. from the University of California, Riverside. He served on the Senior Staff of the Foundation for Economic Education, in Irvington-on-Hudson, New York, and was the president of the Institute for Christian Economics. Dr. North’s essays and reviews have appeared in three dozen magazines and journals, including The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The American Spectator, and others.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
May 20, 2017
This is a summary of North’s PhD dissertation, though it reads better than most dissertations. North outlines three major economic experiments in Puritan New England: 1) govt control of land; 2) govt control of prices; 3) govt control of fashion.
Common Ownership
The problem, as William Bradford noted, if there is common ownership of land, what is to guarantee that men will work for other men’s wives in the field, and that women will sew and weave for other women’s husbands?
Problem 1: "Free" land meant strong demand for its productivity,and town leaders never were able to find a rational, efficient means of restricting uneconomic uses of the town property (North 12).
The problems became so bad that the only way to fix them was to slowly (if reluctantly) introduce free-market solutions. The idea of common ownership was eventually replaced by Jefferson’s yeoman farmer. North writes: “The idea that individual men are more responsible for the administration of property than boards of political appointees or even elected officials became a fundamental principle of eighteenth and nineteenth century American life. The concepts of personal responsibility and personal authority became interlocked, and the great symbol of this fusion was the family farm” (20).
Price Controls
The Puritans inherited the economics of the medieval schoolmen (23).
What is a Just Price?
Problem 2: The effect of these wage ceilings must have presented itself almost immediately: an excess of demand for the services of artisans over the available supply (25).
Max Weber argued that the essence of theocratic and/or socialist regimes was the reliance upon substantive theories of justice (27). But the problem here, as in just prices, is that man can never be sure of what the magistrate would do. This made rational acting and planning by entrepreneurs impossible.
Sumptuary Legislation
The Puritans misinterpreted the 5th commandment on this one. While it is true there are distinctions between superiors, inferiors, and equals, that doesn’t mean the state has to legislate clothing.
As to time-wasting, magistrates employed “licensing.” The licensed taverns.
Problem 3:So when men began to follow the tenets of the Puritan faith, they found themselves steadily increasing in wealth, both personally and culturally. This was to raise an absolutely baffling dilemma: how was the fact of social mobility to be reconciled with medieval categories of fixed status, implying defined place and function (51)?
Conclusion: The hierarchy of medieval life - a hierarchy reflecting a great chain of being from God to Satan - was being shattered by the winds of change. Men and women were increasingly unwilling in the late seventeenth century. to accept the limitations of such arbitrary status concepts of the exercise of their property rights (56).
Common Ownership
The problem, as William Bradford noted, if there is common ownership of land, what is to guarantee that men will work for other men’s wives in the field, and that women will sew and weave for other women’s husbands?
Problem 1: "Free" land meant strong demand for its productivity,and town leaders never were able to find a rational, efficient means of restricting uneconomic uses of the town property (North 12).
The problems became so bad that the only way to fix them was to slowly (if reluctantly) introduce free-market solutions. The idea of common ownership was eventually replaced by Jefferson’s yeoman farmer. North writes: “The idea that individual men are more responsible for the administration of property than boards of political appointees or even elected officials became a fundamental principle of eighteenth and nineteenth century American life. The concepts of personal responsibility and personal authority became interlocked, and the great symbol of this fusion was the family farm” (20).
Price Controls
The Puritans inherited the economics of the medieval schoolmen (23).
What is a Just Price?
Problem 2: The effect of these wage ceilings must have presented itself almost immediately: an excess of demand for the services of artisans over the available supply (25).
Max Weber argued that the essence of theocratic and/or socialist regimes was the reliance upon substantive theories of justice (27). But the problem here, as in just prices, is that man can never be sure of what the magistrate would do. This made rational acting and planning by entrepreneurs impossible.
Sumptuary Legislation
The Puritans misinterpreted the 5th commandment on this one. While it is true there are distinctions between superiors, inferiors, and equals, that doesn’t mean the state has to legislate clothing.
As to time-wasting, magistrates employed “licensing.” The licensed taverns.
Problem 3:So when men began to follow the tenets of the Puritan faith, they found themselves steadily increasing in wealth, both personally and culturally. This was to raise an absolutely baffling dilemma: how was the fact of social mobility to be reconciled with medieval categories of fixed status, implying defined place and function (51)?
Conclusion: The hierarchy of medieval life - a hierarchy reflecting a great chain of being from God to Satan - was being shattered by the winds of change. Men and women were increasingly unwilling in the late seventeenth century. to accept the limitations of such arbitrary status concepts of the exercise of their property rights (56).
August 19, 2025
AN INTERESTING HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION BY NORTH
Gary Kilgore North (born 1942) is head of the Institute for Christian Economics, and a prominent Christian Reconstructionist, who has written widely on many topics (including postmillennial eschatology).
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1988 book, "This book is relatively simple. It covers three topics: the common ownership of land, the imposition of price and wage controls, and sumptuary legislation... I have done my best to present the Puritan economic world-and-life view in terms that can be readily grasped. I have also shown why their attempts to enforce this economic worldview by resorting to the sword of civil government was based, not on biblical revelation, but rather on a specific inherited intellectual tradition: early scholasticism."
He observes, "The towns and colonial governments of seventeenth century New England were not strictly theocracies; ordained ministers could not be elected to political office. But they were important as advisers." (Pg. 10)
He suggests, "There was another incentive to reduce the size of the community-owned property: bureaucratic wrangling... Men had a strong incentive to further their personal economic ends, and far less incentive to consider the public's position. The commons served as incentive to waste, for without a free market and private ownership, it was impossible to calculate accurately the costs and benefits associated with the use of the land." (Pg. 12) He then adds, "Each person who has access to the benefits of public property for use in his own personal business has a positive incentive to drain additional resources from the commons, and he has a very low or even negative incentive to restrain him. The cost of his actions are borne by all the 'owners,' while the benefits are strictly individual." (Pg. 13)
He argues, "(Rhode Island's) founder, Roger Williams, had argued for the separation of church and state---not primarily to protect the state, but to protect the church!" (Pg. 50)
This brief book is a very unique and interesting modern interpretation of the Puritans, and will be of considerable interest to Reconstructionists/Theonomists, as well as students of Puritanism.
Gary Kilgore North (born 1942) is head of the Institute for Christian Economics, and a prominent Christian Reconstructionist, who has written widely on many topics (including postmillennial eschatology).
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1988 book, "This book is relatively simple. It covers three topics: the common ownership of land, the imposition of price and wage controls, and sumptuary legislation... I have done my best to present the Puritan economic world-and-life view in terms that can be readily grasped. I have also shown why their attempts to enforce this economic worldview by resorting to the sword of civil government was based, not on biblical revelation, but rather on a specific inherited intellectual tradition: early scholasticism."
He observes, "The towns and colonial governments of seventeenth century New England were not strictly theocracies; ordained ministers could not be elected to political office. But they were important as advisers." (Pg. 10)
He suggests, "There was another incentive to reduce the size of the community-owned property: bureaucratic wrangling... Men had a strong incentive to further their personal economic ends, and far less incentive to consider the public's position. The commons served as incentive to waste, for without a free market and private ownership, it was impossible to calculate accurately the costs and benefits associated with the use of the land." (Pg. 12) He then adds, "Each person who has access to the benefits of public property for use in his own personal business has a positive incentive to drain additional resources from the commons, and he has a very low or even negative incentive to restrain him. The cost of his actions are borne by all the 'owners,' while the benefits are strictly individual." (Pg. 13)
He argues, "(Rhode Island's) founder, Roger Williams, had argued for the separation of church and state---not primarily to protect the state, but to protect the church!" (Pg. 50)
This brief book is a very unique and interesting modern interpretation of the Puritans, and will be of considerable interest to Reconstructionists/Theonomists, as well as students of Puritanism.
January 22, 2022
Pretty terrific. North gives us three "experiments" that the puritians tried in the settlements. The majority of the laws were pulled from their British government that they had all known and grown accustomed to.
The first was the government control of land and agriculture. This is the one most people are familiar with as it is an example of early socialism in the settlements and colonies. Essentially, a storehouse was erected that collected the goods that the people grew and harvested. These goods were then split between the townspeople and each received an equal portion, regardless of who worked harder to put more in in or lazier and put less into the storehouse. Soon, it became clear that working hard was for chumps because you received no more fruits of your labor than those who slacked off. Eventually the storehouse was close to empty and the experiment ended. People kept their land and food and the economy boomed.
The second was the government control of prices. As labor and careers increased, so did the income of those with skills against those without. Many became wealthy. The thought process of the Puritans was that excessive wealth can lead to excessive temptation and sin. This may be true and it may be not, but in the end there were price guards on many goods and services. Many skilled workers were limited to the amount they could charge for one days work, and so the inevitable took place. People took longer to do the work in order to get paid more. A two-day job became a week long job and so on. Again, many of these laws didn't take long to get repealed. And many of the repeals are still used in today's law to keep some unjust laws at bay.
The last experiment that North wrote about were the sumptuary laws, banning certain types of clothing, entertainment and games, and certain food and drink. This was one where I knew very little about and I found it to be the most interesting of the three. I won't talk much about it so that there will be some enticement to go and read this book for yourself. Suffice to say, not much has changed between then and now. Can you legislate morality? Perhaps. Can you legislate a man to be moral? No. Depravity always finds a way.
Great book and one that I commend to you.
The first was the government control of land and agriculture. This is the one most people are familiar with as it is an example of early socialism in the settlements and colonies. Essentially, a storehouse was erected that collected the goods that the people grew and harvested. These goods were then split between the townspeople and each received an equal portion, regardless of who worked harder to put more in in or lazier and put less into the storehouse. Soon, it became clear that working hard was for chumps because you received no more fruits of your labor than those who slacked off. Eventually the storehouse was close to empty and the experiment ended. People kept their land and food and the economy boomed.
The second was the government control of prices. As labor and careers increased, so did the income of those with skills against those without. Many became wealthy. The thought process of the Puritans was that excessive wealth can lead to excessive temptation and sin. This may be true and it may be not, but in the end there were price guards on many goods and services. Many skilled workers were limited to the amount they could charge for one days work, and so the inevitable took place. People took longer to do the work in order to get paid more. A two-day job became a week long job and so on. Again, many of these laws didn't take long to get repealed. And many of the repeals are still used in today's law to keep some unjust laws at bay.
The last experiment that North wrote about were the sumptuary laws, banning certain types of clothing, entertainment and games, and certain food and drink. This was one where I knew very little about and I found it to be the most interesting of the three. I won't talk much about it so that there will be some enticement to go and read this book for yourself. Suffice to say, not much has changed between then and now. Can you legislate morality? Perhaps. Can you legislate a man to be moral? No. Depravity always finds a way.
Great book and one that I commend to you.
January 23, 2018
Fascinating.
February 3, 2018
Chapter three was good. Most of the first chapters went over my head. It did give me a few new Puritan names to research.
February 20, 2020
I was not aware that the Puritans employed some lousy scholastic/collectivist economics. What couldn't continue, didn't.
August 24, 2011
A little too dense at times for me wee little pee brain, but still good.
January 7, 2013
Excellent historical economics study!
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews