historical_precedent
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| historical_precedent [2020/07/23 19:36] – freeworlder | historical_precedent [2021/08/04 06:11] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== Historical precedents for a moneyless economy ====== | ====== Historical precedents for a moneyless economy ====== | ||
| - | Historical precedent for moneyless or tradeless communities is sparse in terms of evidence, but there is ample reason to believe that primitive human societies were cooperative by default and operated an [[explicit_vs_implicit_trade|implicit trade system]]. In his influential book, //Debt: The First 5000 Years//, anthropologist David Graebar writes: | + | Historical precedent for moneyless or tradeless communities is sparse in terms of evidence, but there is ample reason to believe that primitive human societies were cooperative by default and operated an [[:explicit_vs_implicit_trade|implicit trade system]]. In his influential book, //Debt: The First 5000 Years//, anthropologist David Graebar writes: |
| - | //"The refusal to calculate credits and debits can be found throughout the anthropological literature on egalitarian hunting societies. Rather than seeing himself as human because he could make economic calculations, | + | //"The refusal to calculate credits and debits can be found throughout the anthropological literature on egalitarian hunting societies. Rather than seeing himself as human because he could make economic calculations, |
| - | {{ :: | + | {{ : |
| //"In the villages of the Iroquois, land was owned in common and worked in common. Hunting was done together, and the catch was divided among the members of the village. Houses were considered common property and were shared by several families. The concept of private ownership of land and homes was foreign to the Iroquois.// | //"In the villages of the Iroquois, land was owned in common and worked in common. Hunting was done together, and the catch was divided among the members of the village. Houses were considered common property and were shared by several families. The concept of private ownership of land and homes was foreign to the Iroquois.// | ||
| - | //"A French Jesuit priest who encountered them in the 1650s wrote: 'No poorhouses are needed among them because they are neither mendicants nor paupers...Their kindness, humanity and courtesy not only makes them liberal with what they have but causes them to possess hardly anything except in common."// | + | //"A French Jesuit priest who encountered them in the 1650s wrote: 'No poorhouses are needed among them because they are neither mendicants nor paupers…Their kindness, humanity and courtesy not only makes them liberal with what they have but causes them to possess hardly anything except in common."// |
| - | // | + | // |
| - | Gary Nash also describes the Iroquois' | + | Gary Nash also describes the Iroquois' |
| - | //" | + | //" |
| - | In his book, The Next Copernican Revolution, Troy Wiley writes: | + | In his book, // |
| - | //"Unfortunately, | + | //"[W]e can’t know of some of the moneyless cultures that extend back beyond our historical records, or beyond our 5,000 years of monetary history. […] But can we not surmise that they must have been successful enough to get mankind to where we are now? Can we say the same thing about the future of humanity under a monetary paradigm, given our current trajectory?"// |
| - | {{:: | + | {{: |
| - | //"so naïve and so free with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it. When you ask for something they have, they never say no. To the contrary, they offer to share with anyone...// | + | //"…so naïve and so free with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it. When you ask for something they have, they never say no. To the contrary, they offer to share with anyone…// |
| - | //" | + | //" |
| + | |||
| + | //" | ||
| + | |||
| + | It's important to note that, although almost every occurrence of moneyless societies later ceded to monetised economies, it demonstrates that, without predatory interference and scarcity, humans tend to organise themselves in this way. Presumably, within a prevailing culture of sharing, and without the rigours of accounting, it's the easiest way of organising. | ||
| - | //" | ||
| - | It's important to note that, although almost every occurrence of moneyless societies have later ceded to monetised economies, it demonstrates that, without predatory interference and scarcity, humans tend to organise themselves in this way. Without accounting rigours and in a prevailing culture of sharing, it's simply the easiest way of organising. | ||
historical_precedent.1595532973.txt.gz · Last modified: 2021/08/04 06:11 (external edit)