What's the Austrian Economics take on Inca and Aztec empires not converging on silver as money?
#asknostr nostr:nprofile1qqsyx708d0a8d2qt3ku75avjz8vshvlx0v3q97ygpnz0tllzqegxrtgpg3mhxw309ahhsarjv3jhvctkxc685d35093rw7pkwf4xwdrww3a8z6ngv4jx6dtzx4ax5ut4d36kw6mwdpa8ydpkdeunyutzv9jzummwd9hkutce3hvah
Login to reply
Replies (2)
I got an investment proposals for you, HMU RN for more details and see if you’d like to give it a shot.💯
OK.... I think I have the answer.... Hear me out.
Sound money is a coordination tool for civilisation. High entropy money (inflation) destroys society by reducing trust. Civilisation needs some upper limit on the inflation rate to work at all.
Incas are weird because they used grain as money (terrible stock to flow), but were somehow able to produce cities of 100-130k population. To me, this should be impossible as a coordination excerise without at least converging on silver as money.
I read a magnificent book by Julian Jaynes called "The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of of the bicameral mind". Jaynes argues eruditely, although on the face of it, completely batshit crazy, that humans evolved consciousness in two steps. The first step essentially involved imagined voices in our heads similar to schizophrenics today. People interpreted this as the voice of God. Jaynes argues that this changed around 1100BC on the Euro-Asian landmass but lasted until the Spanish incursions in South America.
I think Incas not converging on silver, yet coordinating society at scale is evidence that they weren't conscience in the sense that we are today.
nostr:nevent1qqsphnkftus7tqj78zwpux0krpgdaa46tdr7mc7jwn07pmaagejdj2spramhxue69uh5ummnw3ezuetfde6kuer6wasku7nfvuh8xurpvdjsygz986uuz568vnkz8frkj5cwdc88c83pqczfkla9me0mpcc7t7gzeypsgqqqqqqsnedjr8