Fiat Law and Fiat Currencies – the Relic of Barbarians
by Lila Rajiva
by Lila Rajiva
Statutory laws,
the laws that get passed with great pomp and circumstance aren't
the laws that really govern society though they might look
like they do.
But if they
really did, why is it that the crimes committed by Soviet commissars
or by the Nazi Gestapo. . . or by the CIA . . . were all committed
with the law books bulging at the seams?
It's not how
many laws you have that matters, but how well those laws
are obeyed.
Which is a
matter of culture and history, of what people expect.... and what
they're prepared to accept.
And to know
that takes the study of history and manners; it needs a knowledge
of morals and religion. The usual smoke and mirrors sideshow supplied
by the political class won't do. You need to turn to the accumulated
wisdom of case law and precedent, of customary law and conventions.
The free market
arose wherever there were laws and systems like that – whether in
Europe or Africa or Asia. One way to think about this difference
would be to see it as the difference between a fiat money, like
paper, and a real store of value, like gold. You can print all the
money you want, but if there's nothing to back it up, then you're
in a bit of trouble. Your creditors are unlikely to put much store
in you as a credit risk, just as the world's wringing its hands
today over the dollar. Pretty soon, they come calling for their
loans with cudgels and pitchforks.
Gold does not
have the same problem, because there's a limited supply of it. It
has to occur in nature. It has to be found somewhere underground
and then mined and refined. It's an expensive business – that takes
risk, time, and money. There are costs attached to it that someone
has to pay. Paper money, on the other hand, can be printed any time
you want. Just ask Ben Bernanke. He's dropping it by the helicopter
load from the clouds.
You
can pass all the laws you want on the statute books, you can employ
stables full of well-groomed and pedigreed lawyers. But if there's
nothing to back the laws, you're in trouble. Businesses aren't going
to want to do business with you. Investors are going to want their
investments back.
The
problem arises because you can pass statutory laws as you like,
even if they have little relation to how the masses of people actually
think and act. That means you can have a country where theft and
looting are the norm that might, nonetheless, have very intricate
laws on the books against theft and looting. The statutes wouldn't
do a thing to change it.
Customary law,
on the other hand, can't be manufactured out of nothing. It grows
organically from the soil in which it lives. It reflects the way
people really think and act. It doesn't run so far ahead
of its times that it provokes either resistance or indifference
from people. Customary law, like gold, reflects real value. And
because it does, it's also likely to be accepted by people more
often. Ultimately, customary law works because it's a more sensitive
and complex measure of a society.
It
contains more information from the past – from the history and traditions
of the people. Like the pricing mechanism, it's a communication
system that allows people to signal their desires and expectations
faster and better than they could otherwise.
Customary law
doesn't just communicate with living members of the group, as pricing
does. It also reflects the desires of generations past, where statutory
law reflects only the demands of one generation, the living.
In that sense statutory law really isn't democratic at all. Or,
at least, not democratic enough. It only consults living citizens.
It forgets the dead ones.
Pure reason,
Cartesian reason, is very good at technical and physical
problems, but it's not nearly as good when it's turned on itself
or on human life. Human brains aren't made that way. We're more
likely to understand who and what we are by looking at things we've
done in the past – which is what we call history – or things we've
made – which is what we call culture, than by logic.
Man is, first
of all, Homo faber (man the creator), and we understand him
best by looking at his creations.
Customary
laws work, in other words, because they come out of the history
and culture of a society. They constitute verum factum (truth
as an act), as the Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico wrote in
1710:
The criterion
and rule of the true is to have made it. Accordingly, our clear
and distinct idea of the mind cannot be a criterion of the mind
itself, still less of other truths. For while the mind perceives
itself, it does not make itself.
As more and
more of our world is no longer made by us, we understand it less
and less. We're forced to fall back on theory and speculation, on
isolated reasoning.
But thinking,
as Vico pointed out, is hopeless when it remains isolated reason.
It has to include practical wisdom and rhetoric. The Cartesian cogito
ergo sum (I think therefore I am) is just not enough.
Vico
liked to argue that the rise of pure rationality in history was
one signal of a declining phase of human culture. He called it the
barbarie della reflessione (the barbarism of reflection)
and said that it characterized what he called The Age of Man.
This was the last phase of his cycle of civilizations.
In
the Age of Man, popular democracy would run amok and lead to tyranny
and empires, which would end in chaos. Then the whole cycle would
begin again, with the age of the gods. And so it goes on from eon
to eon, said Vico.
It
makes you wonder. Does anyone ever learn?
Excerpted
from Minding the Crowd, Dissident
Voice.
Copyright,
December 2006, All Rights Reserved
January
21, 2009
Lila Rajiva
[send her mail] is the
author of the ground-breaking study, The
Language of Empire: Abu Ghraib and the American Media (MR
Press, 2005), and the co-author with Bill Bonner of Mobs,
Messiahs and Markets (Wiley, 2007). Visit her
blog.
Copyright
© 2009 Lila Rajiva
Lila
Rajiva Archives
|