571 sats \ 9 replies \ @k00b 28 Feb \ on: Which brings more peace if it happens in the next 12 months? bitcoin
For the last few centuries we've used the same money in some sense but a group has been in control of it. The group abusing and leveraging their control is at least one input to war. I think obsoleting that group stands a chance of reducing the magnitude of war at least.
Sharing language could make compromise easier but by the same token (hehe) it could make disagreeing easier. Sharing language does not conclude by sharing power, we divide ourselves arbitrarily when there's nothing meaningful to divide on, and I feel like power imbalances fuel and sustain division.
Great reply (and pun too) @k00b. Basically I asked the question based on this David Hume quote I saw:
Two men who pull the oars of a boat, do it by an agreement or convention, tho they have never given promises to one another. In like manner are languages, gradually established by human conventions, without any promise. Much like gold and silver become the common measure of exchange and are esteemed sufficient payment for what is 100 times their value.
Probably, his quote doesn't make sense if universal commodity money (gold/silver) isn't considered, and is instead replaced with fiat, because going back to your first point about money control, fiat value is based on issuing authority trust; acceptance is based on laws requiring its use (i.e, explicit agreements and promises)—etc.
Fiat's value then, didn't organically emerge in the way distributed commodity money did, or emerge in the way language did. In that fundamental way, I feel they're quite similar (language, decentralized money), and that as humans, we're undoubtedly trending towards a universal language and money, slowly of course, not so disruptively. When they both color everything, only space colonization will disrupt them meaningfully. Then again, maybe I don't understand Hume's quote — I'm no philosophy study. But I did mess up with the poll putting that 12-mo timeframe.
reply
I'm going with neither now that i think about it.
reply
If I said the western hemisphere (americas) is mostly a two language and two religion hemisphere, and that this is essentially a war-free zone, does it lend any validity to universal language having cooperative powers, or is that an invalid example?
reply
Monroe doctrine
If illegal aliens spoke English we wouldn’t need to hear “press 2 for Spanish”
California is now Mexifornia
reply
Money and language developed differently.
Language has developed without central planning.
Nations have attempted to stifle language almost always by a dictatorship.
Money or currency is controlled by the state
reply
the nuance I was talking about here was commodity money versus fiat money.
Elimination of central bank will help Argentina 🇦🇷 and change it for the better.
reply
Military industrial complex warned by Eisenhower in 1960.
Deep state shenanigans
reply