1/ In this thread I make a philosophical argument for Bitcoin being a socially scalable contribution to conflict prevention in society, contrasting it with the current system of monetary interventionism.
-
Show this thread
-
2/ All interpersonal conflict has 4 necessary and jointly sufficient causes: Plurality - multiple actors Free access - what actors want is accessible to them Scarcity - desired good is in finite supply Diversity - actors have different values, opinions, preferences
3 replies 4 retweets 38 likesShow this thread -
3/ If one manages to completely remove just one of the four necessary causes, it effectively resolves and prevents interpersonal conflict.
2 replies 5 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
4/ Example: There is one pancake in the room (scarcity & access), and you and I both want it (plurality & diversity). If I convince you that I should have the pancake (removing diversity), the conflict disappears. Another solution is to bake more pancakes (removing scarcity).
1 reply 5 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
5/ In the political world, conflict prevention is usually more sought after in the areas of plurality & diversity (solutions of unity & consensus), whereas the business world focuses more on removing scarcity and restricting access (solutions of abundance and private property).
1 reply 6 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
6/ Rather than creating abundance by ramping up production, one can also create it by diminishing one’s (perceived) needs and wants: asceticism. This was especially popular in premodern times (monasticism), and can still be found in many spiritual/religious teachings.
1 reply 6 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
7/ Now let’s apply this framework to money.
1 reply 4 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
8/ In a pre-money, barter world, people don’t have a lot of possibilities to get their needs and wants met. Even division of labor is hard: if I’m a cobbler, I can’t get eggs until the chicken farmer needs a new pair of shoes.
3 replies 3 retweets 21 likesShow this thread
Great insightful thread overall. Just wanted to point out that this "barter world" is a myth with no basis in history. Before coinage, division of labor was supported by favors & IOU's grounded in personal relationships. (See David Graber's "Debt" for more)
-
-
Replying to @levity
That sounds highly plausable. Still I think my point stands: verbal intra-tribal IOUs only work on a small scale, gold/money is much more scalable.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
