I wouldn't reduce "secularism" to economics. I would suggest that "economics" is the dominant ideology through which a secular state which is bound in service to the protection of the processes of "wealth" accumulation, which, as Meister has argued, now occurs principally in the domain of finance itself (the sublation of capitalist accumulation through the exploitation of labor in the process of production in the "real economy"?), the dominant ideology through which the state both explains and justifies the requirment of preserving and stabilizing the extant economic system. The secular however also references the fundamentally de-mythologizing instinct of a rationalism which, as exhibited in your own work, seeks to challenge the dominant ideology (of economics, of a law which claims to be politically neutral) by revealing how its supposedly neutral justificatory claims are in fact political claims that depend on a certain historical narrative that fails to pass muster when judged by standards of reason itself. Secularism I would suggest includes both the dominant ideology and its immanent critque, potentiating new and perhaps more satisfactory mythopoesis. Or something like that.
I wouldn't reduce "secularism" to economics. I would suggest that "economics" is the dominant ideology through which a secular state which is bound in service to the protection of the processes of "wealth" accumulation, which, as Meister has argued, now occurs principally in the domain of finance itself (the sublation of capitalist accumulation through the exploitation of labor in the process of production in the "real economy"?), the dominant ideology through which the state both explains and justifies the requirment of preserving and stabilizing the extant economic system. The secular however also references the fundamentally de-mythologizing instinct of a rationalism which, as exhibited in your own work, seeks to challenge the dominant ideology (of economics, of a law which claims to be politically neutral) by revealing how its supposedly neutral justificatory claims are in fact political claims that depend on a certain historical narrative that fails to pass muster when judged by standards of reason itself. Secularism I would suggest includes both the dominant ideology and its immanent critque, potentiating new and perhaps more satisfactory mythopoesis. Or something like that.