Secularism in Europe

I was asked how & why secularism spread in Europe? Following is my response, critical feedback requested .... "Two communities in Europe (1) Puritans/Calvinists/Dissenters (aka Protestants) (2) Jews were on the back foot since many centuries thanks to the influence of Church on politics. The Protestants got a chance to excel in scientific literacy and entrepreneurship (Weber, Tawney) and the Jews were good at finance (Sombart) ... Rothschild and Rockefeller families profited by making different ethnic / sectarian factions in Europe to fight with each other for many centuries till they found a way to make more money during peacetime (Polyani) i.e. via colonization, while the protestants also enjoyed the profits from the products starting from the textile industry (uniforms for the militaries in Europe, weapons and other supplies for example) during the same period (Naill Ferguson), and later from other products for the domestic market and colonies ... Protestant entrepreneurs + profits coming in from colonies subsequently facilitated in the industrialization of Europe fueled by Jewish finance. This Combo became a powerful influencer on the political front as well. For example the bank of England during the late 16th century was created to facilitate the economic development in this context (Winnerlind) ... the political system in Europe was inclined toward the emerging financial and industrial order to ensure its own stability, which allowed the modern market system to rise and eventually subdue the political order to its will as Polyani famously said 'Laissez-faire was planned, planning was not' ... the capitalist market system wanted to operate freely within the influence of the state, and a theocratic/catholic state was obviously a problem due to its interventionist stance into the market, therefore, one way or the other it had to go ... a secular state gave a free pass to the free market led by protestant entrepreneurs/industrialists backed by jewish financers (see Sombart) ... Reisman (an Austrian school economist) has clearly mentioned that conservative religious beliefs inhibit free market growth due to their focus on hereafter rather than material progress ... the process of industrialization and subsequent political reforms disintegrated the traditional social order by converting working men into factory labor (a tradable commodity), see Polyani for details. The traditional social order was the source of transmittance of religious beliefs. Traveling to colonies also disconnected at least one person per traditional family (Ferguson). These economic-political changes created a barrier in the transmittance of religious orientation (this is my own assumption) further international avenues to become rich gave lots of people to leave their traditional set up also ... I am here following Micheal Foucault's Power-Discourse thesis, which suggests that any philosophical ideology or ideological discourse doesn't spread in the society unless it becomes useful in facilitating the political authority and that discourse is used in turn to establish or justify the agenda of those in power ... so in this context I have dug out certain historical phenomenon which emerged as a counter current to the authority of catholic church, subsequently leading to its demise as an influencer to determine the state policy, and was replaced by either free market ... So secularism talk about separation of religion from the state, however at the same time, it is historically evident, it immediately accepted the dominance of free-market on the politics (I am not discussing communism here because its not much relevant today I believe) ... and now its the global free-market dominating the nation state as well, means the dominance of capital over every other national or international institutions. This dominance has been recognized as dictatorial by Polyani, Oswald Spengler, Marcuse, Deleuze and more recently Naomi Klien, John Grey, Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel Laureate) etc. ... by dictatorial here I mean that global capitalist order becomes schizophrenically aggressive (Deleuze) against any barrier which restricts the flow of capital in an international context, means it doesn't hesitate to wage war against those who resist in its expansion. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya are recent examples (Naomi Klien). Earlier holocaust of aboriginals (Austrailia, Canada), incas (South America), Red Indians, Chinese (opium wars), Indians in Bangladesh region, exploitation of African blacks which led to hundreds of millions of deaths can be explained in the same light. The first and 2nd world wars were also fought for economic reasons (Polyani, M. A. Jinnah in his SBP inauguration speech) .... The above description is of course not free of generalization which is inevitable in a super short summary I guess ...