:reddit-logo: never fails to disappoint.

  • 5bicycles [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    They pretty much peg the start of capitalism as the bartering stuff between human tribes somewhere x-thousand BCE. Which is obviously pretty dumb but as far as I remember is also supported only by a bunch of capitalist thinking how society could've worked back then (like capitalism) and then deciding this must be true because the central axiom is without capitalism there is no innovation and then you just reason backwards from there.

    • SoyViking [he/him]
      cake
      ·
      3 years ago

      David Graeber wrote a lot about this. The thing about "primitive" societies who haven't invented money yet doing barter instead has no empirical foundation. It was literally made up in the 18th century by British guys sitting in their studies imagining how native American people might do things. Then it was uncritically copied by other authors until it became common sense.

      The known examples of money-less societies used various forms of gift- or favour-based economy instead. Barter-based economies are only known from situations where people who are used to using money suddenly can't use money any more, like in prisons or warzones.

      • 5bicycles [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Just apply the same logic, a tribe of humans that has bartered is obviously a corporation because these people without fault believe in the alpha/beta-human distinction and the tribe leader ist just a CEO