Who should create the money? The State, the citizens or God? At this time, the money is normally associated with the state. However, the current system is not entirely state-owned. Actually, It is an alliance between the private and the public. Furthermore, we cannot say that this fiat money system is totally arbitrary. This solution is the result of a historical process. Mankind, in the past, has experimented with different forms of money. And we know well from experience that all forms of money have their pros and cons. For this reason, we have resorted to this mixed form. Because, within the mixed system, the different elements create a balance through checks and balances. So by avoiding extremes, in the middle, the flaws are smoothed out a bit.
Of course, the “mixed” is not everyone’s friend. There are always currents aspiring to establish less “ambiguous” solutions. Some sectors of the left propose to completely eliminate all private elements in order to cede all control to state power. This is done in the name of equality and social justice. From experience, we know the tragic outcome of this story.. With all power in one center, sooner or later, a tyranny is imposed that destroys the economy to favor the elite in power.
These positions on the far left provoke an equally extreme reaction from the right. In defense of freedom, the right takes a reactionary attitude to the advances of statism. I mean, let’s go back in time. And it begins to idealize classical liberalism. But, from experience, we also know the tragic outcome of this story. because we already know that the private sector left to the good of God creates a Wild West as destructive and unfair as a state tyranny.
As a reference, we can turn to the United States of the 19th century. Fragmentation, fraud, manipulation and chaos were our daily bread in those days. The era of free banking in the United States was characterized by instability. Conditions at the time fostered a distrust that usually ended in financial panics and bank runs (“bank run”). Sounds familiar?
It is quite ironic that a country built around money and commerce has had so much trouble creating a truly national currency. In fact, it could be argued that the American culture of Protestant individualism made it very difficult to implement centralized solutions for the entire federation. Eventually, a centralized solution did come about, but it got there because of the resounding failure of the decentralized system. I mean, centralism was accepted as a necessary evil by exhaustion. In this case, he won pragmatism over libertarian values.
The tendency of the new conservative generations to idealize libertarian dogmas in the context of cryptocurrencies stems, in large part, from ignorance. In fact, many believe that all these ideas were born with Bitcoin. I mean, apparently, all this is totally new. “There had never been such a thing”, I have heard several times from so-called experts on the subject. Which becomes a great advantage. Because the opposition is always right. And every utopia is perfect in the imagination. Then fanaticism can spread more easily.
However, what Satoshi Nakamoto actually did was propose a gold-inspired (digital) citizen currency. Due to this relationship with gold and technology, the first enthusiasts of this new citizen currency were computer scientists, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, and conservatives. The gold standard was already a very popular approach within this current. So, Bitcoin is a kind of California-style gold standard, but adapted to the new digital age. Thanks to social networks, all these groups with similar ideas and values gathered around the new project. That is, the new was formed with old ideas. But, due to the novelty of the terms and the ingenuity of the young, the initiative is presented as completely original.
After the 2007 credit crunch, the anti-establishment spirit spread everywhere. And the political center practically disappeared. Now what we have are extremists. The moderates are very few. Now what we have are left-wing extremists and right-wing extremists fighting each other. This is a polarized world. It’s them against us. It is us against them. The goal is no longer the common good. The goal is to fight the enemy.
Who is the enemy? Governments, central banks, private banks, the liberal press, corporations, “Keynesian” economists and progressives. Who is the friendly side? The enlightened town The promoters of the libertarian utopia. Anyone who thinks like me. In practice, all the militancy. And all the influencers of that current.
In any modern country, the State is normally the largest employer, the largest creditor, the largest debtor, the largest service provider, the largest buyer, and the largest partner. Every citizen has an economic relationship with the State. In most cases, state intervention in the economy is inevitable. The best thing to do is regulate that intervention with checks and balances so that that intervention is as beneficial as possible.
On the other hand, private money is not a panacea. And much less private money based on free market fundamentalism. Money is a form of organization. In reality, it affects the whole society. Beyond the theoretical justifications for it, in this case I resort to pragmatism. Without the support and control of the great social and political institutions, what is totally private cannot gain much space. The conquest of the private over everything else is a chimera. Ayn Rand’s dream, in my opinion, is unlikely. Sooner or later, people will seek to organize behind a common front. Sooner or later, people will want to enforce justice through rules. I highly doubt that the large-scale libertarian utopia has much of a future. I believe more in mixed systems. A partial privatization will be the closest thing to utopia that we can achieve.
Should money be private? Don’t know. Maybe yes. Not soon. The point is that the investor’s goal is not to reform the system. It is not the fight for utopia. The investor’s goal is to grow financially. It is a practical purpose. It is not an ideological crusade. So, what should occupy our time is the search for financial opportunities. This requires a very particular objectivity. Impartial observation is required to be able to make the best decisions. In the investment world, idiosyncrasy is usually counterproductive. Don’t follow utopia. Follow the money.
Disclaimer: The information and/or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views or editorial line of Cointelegraph. The information presented here should not be taken as financial advice or investment recommendation. All investment and commercial movement involve risks and it is the responsibility of each person to do their due research before making an investment decision.
It may interest you:
Investments in crypto assets are not regulated. They may not be suitable for retail investors and the entire amount invested may be lost. The services or products offered are not directed or accessible to investors in Spain.