Let’s talk about money and the State (Sovereign).

Since everyone constantly gets this wrong.
1/

So look: there never was a barter-centric state of nature.

That’s a nice story but when we look at the historical record, it’s just flat out false.

In point of fact:

- Debt predates money.
- Money predates barter.
2/
The way the Sovereign first got involved with debt was something like this:

King: “If you don’t give me 3 goats during harvest season, my soldiers will come burn your fucking house down.”

And in this way, the King originated a debt.

By fiat.
3/
But moving goats around sucks (horrible creatures) and is just sort of logistically annoying, so a new plan was devised, like this:

King: “Same deal with the soldiers and the burning and the profanity, but now it’s 50 pieces of silver instead of goats.”

Presto! Money!
4/
Money is a token that settles debts - always has been. The reason it’s useful is because it allows society to function like an abacus with N players.

In lieu of just the sovereign playing debt, these tokens are ‘debt settlement bearer assets’ which allow…well... the economy
5/
What makes a thing money is its ability to settle debts.

All money is fiat.

It’s fiat because we all agree, by fiat, that it will be sufficient unto the settlement of debt. Because we want to have an economy.
6/
Some people like a certain type of token.

Hard money advocates (of all varieties) seem to believe that a supply-constrained token (gold/BTC) is “good” because it’s more “natural” — if you watch closely, you can see these recurrent themes pop up in their language:
7/
This specific form of reasoning failure is called the “appeal to nature fallacy,” and is most often used as a conduit to imply moral superiority without having to make a case for it.

But anyhow, tokens are just tokens - they’re for debt settlement.
8/

https://t.co/SxUWU0fCLN
So now let’s think about the Sovereign of today vs. the ones of yesteryear.

Kings would simply originate debts by decree (‘you owe me goats/silver!’) and this was just sort of the way things worked.

Until representative democracy (and other representative approaches)!
9/
Representative governments are an attempt to “hijack the Sovereign” and create a group project sovereign that we all get a say in.

That ‘power domain’ doesn’t tend to remain empty for long (much to the chagrin of anarchists), so the Founding Fathers filled it.

With us.
10/
You may not like the job we’re doing currently, and I’d agree that it’s a little weird and there’s a lot of underrepresentation but…it’s still a hell of a lot better than previous ways (real ones from history, not fantasies).

It also means that we already control the money.
11/
So now let’s ponder: why would we, as a society, “debase” our money? Like, why would we do that to ourselves?

Well - remember that all money is is a debt settlement token.

Now consider that we, as a society, have a boatload of debt, both public and private.
12/
In a society where there’s a lot of debt, periodically juicing the amount of tokens available so that people can access them somewhat easier sort of makes sense - it provides more opportunities for people to get tokens and pay off debts with them (vs. just getting wiped out).
13/
For as long as there has been debt, there has been debt forgiveness — levered systems periodically need a reset.

Inflation targeting is, from one standpoint, simply a “perpetual light jubilee” that makes debt loads easier for everyone to carry.
14/
So next time you ranting about the state, remember:

This is a historically superior type of Sovereign (we have some say, which is rare, historically speaking).

Some amount of the tithe this Sovereign exacts goes toward the common good (a high amount, historically speaking).
15/
Those who would complain about this system would do well to first respect it.

Few have ever had it this good, from the perspective of both governance and money.

So let's stop being so ridiculous and decadent, it’s unsightly.
16/
I’m sure people will want to debate this but there’s really not much point to that, IMO, unless you’ve read the material. There is a long history here, and it's relevant.

Now, it you want to debate after reading the material, I’m totally down.

This is the material:
/17

More from Travis Kimmel

More from Society

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW
global health policy in 2020 has centered around NPI's (non-pharmaceutical interventions) like distancing, masks, school closures

these have been sold as a way to stop infection as though this were science.

this was never true and that fact was known and knowable.

let's look.


above is the plot of social restriction and NPI vs total death per million. there is 0 R2. this means that the variables play no role in explaining one another.

we can see this same relationship between NPI and all cause deaths.

this is devastating to the case for NPI.


clearly, correlation is not proof of causality, but a total lack of correlation IS proof that there was no material causality.

barring massive and implausible coincidence, it's essentially impossible to cause something and not correlate to it, especially 51 times.

this would seem to pose some very serious questions for those claiming that lockdowns work, those basing policy upon them, and those claiming this is the side of science.

there is no science here nor any data. this is the febrile imaginings of discredited modelers.

this has been clear and obvious from all over the world since the beginning and had been proven so clearly by may that it's hard to imagine anyone who is actually conversant with the data still believing in these responses.

everyone got the same R
Like most movements, I have learned that the definition of feminism has expanded to include simply treating women like human beings.

(A thread for whoever feels like reading)


I have observed feminists on Twitter advocating for rape victims to be heard, rapists to be held accountable, for people to address the misogyny that is deeply rooted in our culture, and for women to be treated with respect.

To me, very easy things to get behind.

And the amount of pushback they receive for those very basic requests is appalling. I see men trip over themselves to defend rape and rapists and misogyny every chance they get. Some accounts are completely dedicated to harassing women on this site. It’s unhealthy.

Furthermore, I have observed how dedicated these misogynists are by how they treat other men that do not immediately side with them. There is an entire lexicon they have created for men who do not openly treat women with disrespect.

Ex: simp, cuck, white knight, beta

All examples of terms they use to demean a man who respects women.

To paraphrase what a wise man on this app said:

Some men hate women so much, they hate men who don’t hate women

You May Also Like