Anyone serious about replacing our current money will first of all have to understand its nature: How could anything so fundamentally flawed not only survive, but actually thrive for so long? Sure enough, money isn't a natural disaster, but a human invention - and we, the human species, even use it voluntarily. Our money system collapses on a regular basis, causing death and destruction in the process - but when that happens, all we can think of is rebuilding it again - in pretty much the same way as it was, and without any noteworthy adaptions that could keep us out of harm's way. There have been alternative currencies for decades - on the surface of the traditional financial system, however, they have hardly left a scratch.
Taking all that into account, it becomes apparent that ridding us of traditional money won't be easy. It would certainly help if money was against our nature - but not even that seems to be the case: Money fits us humans pretty much like a glove, and the fact that wearing it causes so much pain and misery is by no means a contradiction. As humans, we are highly attracted to money, and it seems like our love attachment can only be troubled if the beloved one abandons us (although that is where the trouble actually starts, as it's the unrealized love that we do weird things for).
Following this train of thought to the end, it is quite easy to see that you cannot replace something that's attractive and sensual with something unattractive and anemic (just like to most, you can't pitch raw celery to replace savory junk food - regardless of whether or not that might do us good). Having money isn't just pleasurable, it also satisfies our baser human instincts. Using money neither requires moral transcendency, nor altruism or foresight. And money is also a source of reassurance. Insofar, the history of money is a story of success - at least for the money. In order to come up with a different kind of medium of exchange that is equally successful, we certainly seem well-advised to take a very close look at that story of success, and to learn from it. Money works in a viral, almost physiological way, and there is hardly anyone who is fully immune against it. Most likely, a full-fledged money replacement would have to attach to the same human receptacles: it would have to beat the system at its own game.
To have any impact at all, new money must be competitive - it needs be on a par with the old money, and must be attractive even to those whose hearts haven't been broken by the old system yet. Without reaching all money users, it is hardly possible to arrive at the scale of participation that is vital for a functioning financial system. The trick isn't getting a couple of people to use an alternative currency - it's getting a lot of people to abandon their traditional currencies, which is the hard part. The true value of a new currency can be measured as a product of innovation and proliferation - few decisive changes, which find broad acceptance, can go a much longer way than extensive restructuring plans, when it is clear that implementing them on a larger scale is just not feasible.
To rule out future abuse for good, the process of issuing money needs to be democratized, and the medium of exchange must be removed from the control of a privileged minority once and for all. It can only be regarded as a bizarre irony of history, that article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates a "right to work", while the right to create a medium of exchange, which is indispensable to exercise the right to work in a meaningful and self-serving way, was simply "forgotten". Future generations are likely to look back in disbelief on these barbaric ages, in which the right to issue money was the privilege of a few, and which were affected by oppression, suffering and destruction. Hope remains that this day is not in the too distant future.
| << The problem with traditional money | The CONCEPT >> |
Details
• Since money typically causes the biggest problems when absent, it often seems to have some sort of "alibi" - history, however, shows that money is always a deserved prime suspect when there is a human crisis in any shape or form.
• In a global climate which pretty much construes the free market as a moral imperative, finding out if the bank monopoly to issue legal tender can't be annulled in court could be an interesting experiment. A financial market that is truely free, and in which alternative currencies can compete on par with bank money, would definitely be a step in the right direction. In this respect, the European Union's Competition Regulatory Authority could be an unexpected ally.
• While democratizing the process of money creation, it should not be overlooked that banks in today's monetary system actually perform several useful core tasks, which cannot be easily abandoned within an alternative currency. One of these tasks is to ensure, that the ability of participants to obtain money doesn't grossly exceed their economic abilities.
• Since money typically causes the biggest problems when absent, it often seems to have some sort of "alibi" - history, however, shows that money is always a deserved prime suspect when there is a human crisis in any shape or form.
• In a global climate which pretty much construes the free market as a moral imperative, finding out if the bank monopoly to issue legal tender can't be annulled in court could be an interesting experiment. A financial market that is truely free, and in which alternative currencies can compete on par with bank money, would definitely be a step in the right direction. In this respect, the European Union's Competition Regulatory Authority could be an unexpected ally.
• While democratizing the process of money creation, it should not be overlooked that banks in today's monetary system actually perform several useful core tasks, which cannot be easily abandoned within an alternative currency. One of these tasks is to ensure, that the ability of participants to obtain money doesn't grossly exceed their economic abilities.