At the Mises site, there is
published an article by Hans Hoppe, entitled “Banking, Nation States, and International Politics:
A Sociological Reconstruction of the Present Economic Order.” I
focus on one section:
While it is in everyone's
economic interest that there be only one universal money and only one unit of
account, and man in his pursuit of wealth maximization will not stop until this
goal is reached, it is contrary to such interest that there be only one bank or
one monopolistic banking system. Rather, self-interest commands that every bank
use the same universal money — gold — and that there then be no competition
between different monies, but that free competition between banks and banking
systems, all of which use gold, must exist.
While reading this, it struck
me: there is a parallel to this and the medieval order – a period in history
when law was relatively libertarian and governance was quite
decentralized. I took a crack at capturing the parallel, with
changes noted in red:
While it is in everyone's political interest
that there be only one universal ethic and
only one ethical yardstick, and man in his pursuit of liberty maximization
will not stop until this goal is reached, it is contrary to such interest that
there be only one king or one monopolistic state.
Rather, self-interest commands that every king use
the same universal ethic — natural law defended by the Church — and
that there then be no competition between different ethics, but
that free competition between kings and states, all
of which use the Natural Law defended by the Church, must exist.
To summarize my modifications:
Economic = Political
Money = Ethic
Gold = Natural Law
defended by the Church (the Universal Ethic)
Unit of Account = Ethical
Yardstick
Wealth maximization = Liberty
Bank = King
Banking System = State
My modified paragraph describes
quite well the medieval order. So it got me to thinking further…the
context of Hoppe’s words is his description of the development of money in the
market; this was driven by the desire for maximizing economic
efficiency. In my modified paragraph, I find maximized liberty.
In neither case do we find
perfection – either a perfectly efficient market or a perfect liberty. Nothing
done by imperfect humans can be perfect. But in both cases we find
maximum choice, maximum possibilities. In both cases we find
examples of the maximum (economic efficiency / liberty) afforded to man on
earth.
There is a story to be told
here. Maybe someone has written it; if so, I welcome a link. In
any case, I will think about this some more.
