The things you are mentioning, Keith, like the Thirty Years' War, are the darkest aspects of human nature. And to echo your point, they seem to be ubiquitous among our kind.
But I also notice that these dark aspects result from ego, or our conception of self. I reckon that a revolution in self-conceptualization could liberate us from greed and and the desire for control over resources and other people.
I think this revolution is already percolating on the fringes of human society, in proportion to the rise of greed and control that modern systems have enabled. It seems to me that this has happened before, during the Roman Empire and during the Renaissance.
I can't help but feel hopeful when I peruse the pages of history. That was my inspiration for this Substack, at any rate. Thanks for the comment!
Without evidence, I am supposing that while the new 'nation states' were politically sound, their economics maintained medieval practices and views. Some time after Westphalia, states began issuing fiat money and abandoning metallic money. This must have created a new paradigm for economies, much easier and more efficient for transactions and investments (and for war). Nevertheless, we moderns still have not fully abandoned medieval monetary theories. So that mmt contends with MMT.
Indeed, the world's oldest central bank, the Bank of England, formed just 46 years after the Peace at Westphalia in 1694. And then in 1717, the Freemasons founded the Grand Lodge of England.
I believe that the deposition of the popes in 1648 left a power vacuum, which was quickly filled by the banking houses.
Possibly we need to start to examine the basic physical relationship between nodes and networks, rather than just constructing whatever version fits our current predicament.
Organisms and ecosystems. Focus and field. Synchronization and harmonization. Nervous system and circulation system. Individuals and society. Nationalism and internationalism.
It is a dynamic that is so pervasive and foundational, that it not only doesn't fit into any particular box, map, model, but is the basis for those frames and their relationships to other frames. A cross model model.
Generals lead armies. Specialist is one rank above private.
While the organisms and ecosystems we see all around evolved by gradual adaptation over time, I believe we must get out ahead of the that process, as you suggest here, John.
I very much like your comparison of those organisms and ecosystems to those economic systems. But I wonder what kind of system you think we need to adopt? Said another way: I love your diagnosis, but wonder about your cure? Do we need separate currencies for store of value and medium of exchange?
I think we need to seriously understand the difference between medium and store. In your body, bone and muscle are even more effective stores than fat. In fact, unless you need it for thermal insulation, fat isn't a particularly useful store. It's just the we have automated physical work so much that people have to find ways to keep exercised.
So stores need to be tangible value built into the social fabric and physical environment. Everything from clean air and water to healthy social communities.
Money is a contract. It is a promise of a quantified value from the rest of the community to the holder. Think of it as community tokens. Would it make sense to just create enormous numbers of community tokens and strip mining all value out of society in order to back them up with some quantity of value?
To paraphrase; "First we fire all the economists."
Well, I certainly agree that we've debased our currency to a horrifying degree already, John. But we didn't just print the money (that would have been bad enough). We also borrowed it interest from the already-wealthy, creating a massive debt liability ON TOP of a debased and devalued currency. I believe some truly shocking economic fireworks are in the not-too-distant future!
That control of the currency by the wealthy is the problem.
Consider the Federal debt began its current ascent with the New Deal, so not only was Roosevelt putting unemployed labor back to work, but unemployed capital as well.
Do you think he might have been as worried about keeping the capital markets as busy as the workers?
So who benefits from public debt? The public, or the people with more money than they have any use for, so finding someone to loan it to is necessary?
Is money public property, or private property? It's a medium, like a road.
If it's private property, the owners can charge a fee, call it interest, for anyone who wants to rent it.
If we were to consider it a public utility, like public roads, with pictures of public figures on it, shouldn't we charge a fee to those with more than they know what to do with? Maybe call it a tax?
Then there wouldn't be as much interest in pilling up far more than is necessary and consequently debasing its value.
"If it's private property, the owners can charge a fee, call it interest, for anyone who wants to rent it."
"If we were to consider it a public utility, like public roads, with pictures of public figures on it, shouldn't we charge a fee to those with more than they know what to do with? Maybe call it a tax?"
This is such a great way to put it, John! These words really lay bare the extent to which we've been had.
Though it really gets me the entire economy is totally flummoxed by not understanding what a medium is. With all our vast knowledge, the basics are lost in the details.
A fatal human flaw that I don’t think will ever end and that is the othering and war and jamming religion down your throat
The things you are mentioning, Keith, like the Thirty Years' War, are the darkest aspects of human nature. And to echo your point, they seem to be ubiquitous among our kind.
But I also notice that these dark aspects result from ego, or our conception of self. I reckon that a revolution in self-conceptualization could liberate us from greed and and the desire for control over resources and other people.
I think this revolution is already percolating on the fringes of human society, in proportion to the rise of greed and control that modern systems have enabled. It seems to me that this has happened before, during the Roman Empire and during the Renaissance.
I can't help but feel hopeful when I peruse the pages of history. That was my inspiration for this Substack, at any rate. Thanks for the comment!
Without evidence, I am supposing that while the new 'nation states' were politically sound, their economics maintained medieval practices and views. Some time after Westphalia, states began issuing fiat money and abandoning metallic money. This must have created a new paradigm for economies, much easier and more efficient for transactions and investments (and for war). Nevertheless, we moderns still have not fully abandoned medieval monetary theories. So that mmt contends with MMT.
Haha, that's very clever, Tedder.
Indeed, the world's oldest central bank, the Bank of England, formed just 46 years after the Peace at Westphalia in 1694. And then in 1717, the Freemasons founded the Grand Lodge of England.
I believe that the deposition of the popes in 1648 left a power vacuum, which was quickly filled by the banking houses.
Nathan,
Possibly we need to start to examine the basic physical relationship between nodes and networks, rather than just constructing whatever version fits our current predicament.
Organisms and ecosystems. Focus and field. Synchronization and harmonization. Nervous system and circulation system. Individuals and society. Nationalism and internationalism.
It is a dynamic that is so pervasive and foundational, that it not only doesn't fit into any particular box, map, model, but is the basis for those frames and their relationships to other frames. A cross model model.
Generals lead armies. Specialist is one rank above private.
While the organisms and ecosystems we see all around evolved by gradual adaptation over time, I believe we must get out ahead of the that process, as you suggest here, John.
I very much like your comparison of those organisms and ecosystems to those economic systems. But I wonder what kind of system you think we need to adopt? Said another way: I love your diagnosis, but wonder about your cure? Do we need separate currencies for store of value and medium of exchange?
Nathan,
I think we need to seriously understand the difference between medium and store. In your body, bone and muscle are even more effective stores than fat. In fact, unless you need it for thermal insulation, fat isn't a particularly useful store. It's just the we have automated physical work so much that people have to find ways to keep exercised.
So stores need to be tangible value built into the social fabric and physical environment. Everything from clean air and water to healthy social communities.
Money is a contract. It is a promise of a quantified value from the rest of the community to the holder. Think of it as community tokens. Would it make sense to just create enormous numbers of community tokens and strip mining all value out of society in order to back them up with some quantity of value?
To paraphrase; "First we fire all the economists."
Well, I certainly agree that we've debased our currency to a horrifying degree already, John. But we didn't just print the money (that would have been bad enough). We also borrowed it interest from the already-wealthy, creating a massive debt liability ON TOP of a debased and devalued currency. I believe some truly shocking economic fireworks are in the not-too-distant future!
Nathan,
That control of the currency by the wealthy is the problem.
Consider the Federal debt began its current ascent with the New Deal, so not only was Roosevelt putting unemployed labor back to work, but unemployed capital as well.
Do you think he might have been as worried about keeping the capital markets as busy as the workers?
So who benefits from public debt? The public, or the people with more money than they have any use for, so finding someone to loan it to is necessary?
Is money public property, or private property? It's a medium, like a road.
If it's private property, the owners can charge a fee, call it interest, for anyone who wants to rent it.
If we were to consider it a public utility, like public roads, with pictures of public figures on it, shouldn't we charge a fee to those with more than they know what to do with? Maybe call it a tax?
Then there wouldn't be as much interest in pilling up far more than is necessary and consequently debasing its value.
Accept you have been brainwashed.
"If it's private property, the owners can charge a fee, call it interest, for anyone who wants to rent it."
"If we were to consider it a public utility, like public roads, with pictures of public figures on it, shouldn't we charge a fee to those with more than they know what to do with? Maybe call it a tax?"
This is such a great way to put it, John! These words really lay bare the extent to which we've been had.
It was coming to me as I was writing that.
Though it really gets me the entire economy is totally flummoxed by not understanding what a medium is. With all our vast knowledge, the basics are lost in the details.