This paper aims to illustrate a theoretical aspect that has not been adequately analysed: that of the relationship between moral conservatism and Neoliberal economic policies. To do this, it is significant to delve into the political thought of James M. Buchanan.

It may appear that Buchanan, as a defender of contract theory, has little to do with moral considerations. It is important to emphasise the fact that he advocates the existence of a ‘moral framework’, which is an important element in the implementation of a non-expansionary economic policy.

We want to put forward the idea that for Buchanan economic constitutionalism is best defended in the presence of an appropriate ethical structure that permeates the society. Buchanan repeatedly emphasises the importance of small communities, based on shared cultural assumptions, regarding them as a way to resist State power. Buchanan understands that it is better to have strong cultural constraints in order to contain the political and economic activity of the state.

According to Buchanan, there is a close relationship between social customs, constitutional framework and economic policy. He is of the opinion that it is not possible to negotiate community relationships unless they rest on a solid ethical basis. In this paper I want to show that the connection between ethical and religious dimension guarantees the stability of society. According to Buchanan, the religion (Christianity, in the case of Western societies) is able to offer society the necessary stability for the decision-making process.

The Protestant outlook, which influenced Buchanan, is an important factor of cohesion for entire communities. As argued by David A. Reisman, Buchanan shares a Weberian vision of Protestant ethics: the importance given to the work ethic and to the individual autonomy is a significant cultural restraint to the idea that the state should intervene to redress the social inequalities.

As it has already been argued, he realises that the decision-making process cannot comply with the unanimity rule if society is characterised by a marked pluralism of values. This is the case with Western democracies. He believes that, only in small, culturally homogeneous social groups, it is very likely that at least some decisions will meet the general consensus. He therefore defends a kind of ‘micro-contracting’ (Reisman 1990, 116).