Priesthood without an altar: the central bank as an institution of faith

🇵🇱 Polski
Priesthood without an altar: the central bank as an institution of faith

📚 Based on

Priest of prosperity

👤 About the Author

Juliet Johnson

McGill University

Juliet Johnson is a Professor of Political Science at McGill University. Her research focuses on the politics of money and identity, particularly in post-communist Europe. She is the author of *Priests of Prosperity* and *A Fistful of Rubles*.

Introduction

Central banks are not merely government offices, but "priests of prosperity." This article analyzes how modern central banking has fostered a quasi-religious culture where legitimacy rests on a belief in competence shielded by hermetic language. You will learn why the transplantation of Western models to post-communist countries created a "wormhole network" and how the 2008 crisis led to the birth of financial nationalism. Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for assessing the stability of the contemporary economic order and the future of global business.

Priests of Prosperity and the Norm Transfer Mechanism

Juliet Johnson describes bankers as priests of prosperity—custodians of rituals and a hermetic code that functions like medieval Latin. The wormhole network mechanism allows national elites to connect directly with global professional hubs, such as Basel, while completely bypassing local public opinion. This model rests on two pillars: price stability and political independence, which in the 1990s rose to the status of dogmas of credibility.

The process of transplanting this model involves three stages: political choice, institutional transformation, and the most difficult—internalization—embedding the new logic into the social consciousness. Failure in this final stage gives rise to the "sins of transformation." The sin of excess is the elevation of independence to the level of isolation from the rest of the state, while the sin of omission is an obsession with inflation coupled with the neglect of the financial stability of the entire system.

The 2008 Crisis and the Birth of Financial Nationalism

The 2008 crisis shattered the myth of technocratic infallibility, exposing the political dimension of their actions. This paved the way for financial nationalism—a strategy that uses monetary tools to promote national interests in opposition to global dogmas. The case of Hungary illustrates this transition: from a model neophyte to "apostasy," where the central bank became a tool for supporting national champions (so-called repurposing).

Different trajectories are visible in the Czech Republic and Slovakia: Prague focused on technocratic efficiency, while Bratislava used the euro as an external shield of credibility. Meanwhile, Russia negotiated its position in the global network from a stance of imperial power, and Kyrgyzstan remained a "potted garden"—creating a modern institution that, lacking social roots, became a politically powerless scapegoat.

Independence vs. Accountability: A New Risk Map

The contemporary dilemma of banking is the aporia between independence and accountability. In an era of polarization, a bank's operational autonomy is at risk if it is not accompanied by an understandable language for justifying decisions. The solution may be a constitution of credibility—a new mandate in which the central bank steps out of the shadow of technocracy and subjects its goals to public debate to avoid accusations of usurpation.

For global business, this means a hybridization of models. The world will split into zones of hard independence and areas where money is a tool of state policy. The institutional risk premium will depend on whether a central bank can build social recognition or hides behind jargon. The stability of the rules of the game will become more important than interest rates themselves.

Summary

A priest who hides a ritual behind a veil of technocratic jargon risks being accused of witchcraft. In the coming order, the winner will not be the most orthodox central bank, but the one capable of building resilience against delegitimization through the transparent justification of its decisions. Should the power over money remain the domain of procedures, or should it be subject to democratic control to avoid a revolt of the sovereign? The answer to this question will define the financial stability of the coming decade.

📄 Full analysis available in PDF

📖 Glossary

Wormhole network
Metaforyczna sieć tuneli czasoprzestrzennych łącząca bezpośrednio krajowe elity finansowe z globalnymi centrami profesjonalnymi, omijająca lokalną debatę publiczną.
Teoria niespójności w czasie
Koncepcja zakładająca, że politycy ulegają pokusie krótkookresowego stymulowania gospodarki, co zmusza do przekazania władzy nad pieniądzem niezależnym ekspertom.
Wspólnota epistemiczna
Sieć profesjonalistów o uznanej wiedzy specjalistycznej, którzy dzięki wspólnym przekonaniom i metodologii wywierają dominujący wpływ na daną dziedzinę polityki publicznej.
Internalizacja instytucjonalna
Najtrudniejszy etap reformy polegający na głębokim zakorzenieniu nowej instytucji w świadomości społecznej, tak by była uznawana za naturalną i słuszną.
Nacjonalizm finansowy
Strategia wykorzystywania narzędzi polityki pieniężnej do promowania interesu narodowego, często w kontrze do uniwersalnych dogmatów globalizacji finansowej.
Aporia suwerenności
Sytuacja bez wyjścia lub logiczna sprzeczność między niezależnością technokratyczną banku a oczekiwaniami społeczeństwa co do demokratycznej odpowiedzialności za gospodarkę.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is the central bank compared to a religious institution?
Because its legitimacy is based on a belief in competence, and the institution itself uses a hermetic language and rituals that isolate it from the secular environment.
What is a 'wormhole network' in the context of banking?
It is a network of connections that allows financial ideas to circulate among elites in Basel or Prague faster than they can be understood by local parliaments and citizens.
What are the main pillars of modern central banking?
This model is based on two pillars: the pursuit of price stability (low inflation) and institutional independence from the current political and electoral game.
What is the 'sin of excess' in monetary policy?
This is a situation in which bank independence becomes a dogma that prevents cooperation with the government, leading to fiscal and monetary policy canceling each other out.
Why might society reject the independent bank model?
If an institution is technically efficient but has not been socially internalized, in times of crisis its decisions are perceived as acts of an alien, imposed authority, rather than medical treatments for the economy.

Related Questions

🧠 Thematic Groups

Tags: central bank Juliet Johnson priests of prosperity wormhole network price stability political independence post-communist transformation epistemic community financial nationalism time inconsistency theory technocracy legitimization of power institutional ritual selection code sovereignty