[ExI] Must money be a state monopoly?

Anders Sandberg anders at aleph.se
Tue Jun 10 10:28:11 UTC 2014


Tara Maya <tara at taramayastales.com> , 9/6/2014 11:25 PM:
I'm aware of the libertarian roots of Bitcoin and other digital currencies, which some individuals hope (and some states fear) can become true currencies not printed and controlled by a state. I wonder if why it is that states do monopolize currencies (or try to) and what the dangers would be if states simply stopped doing this. Any thoughts?

Coming from a libertarian/Nozickian minarchist angle, it seems that the only legitimate job of the state is protecting the rights and freedoms of the citizens. Usually that is seen as violence monopoly, but it might extend to protection from epidemics too (protection from wild animals too small to see!) However, obviously there are plenty of other functions that are nice to have, it is just that it is not clear the state (the violence monopoly) should be the one running them.  
Money has not always been a state monopoly - corporate scrip was widespread, and occasionally I come across Scottish banknotes that are indeed marked with the bank that printed them (valid tender even down here in South England). There might be reasons to want to centralize these functions: I don't know enough economics to argue about it. But even if one wants to centralize money it is not clear that the money monopoly has to be the violence monopoly. In fact, to balance power it might be very reasonable to keep them apart!
Charles Stross had a character make the point (in Glasshouse) that the legitimate role of the state is violence monopoly, timekeeping and identity management. Timekeeping matters since the sequencing of events is paramount for many functions, including the crypto that may underlie money and identity. Identity is not just important for being able to make contracts (the foundation for much minarchist/anarchocapitalist society) but also for effective law enforcement (if it is not possible to tell who did what, at best crude deterrence and heavy locks are the solution). Some of the cryptocurrencies might also take on interesting identity properties; it would be fun to consider if one could put identity management into not just bitcoin wallets but into proof-of-work. 
(Or, as I suggested a few months ago, run uploaded minds *on* the money infrastructure)

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140610/417bc712/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list