|
While I have not claimed that private entities are exempt from engaging in violence, the essence of the state, is it not, lies in its exclusive dominion over violence, ostensibly to foster a non-violent society? This assertion is far from nonsensical; it is a veritable truth, one conspicuously absent from educational curricula, likely because states find the acknowledgment of their historical predilection for violence too ignominious to bear. Taxation stands as the state’s principal means of amassing resources. Yet, for those states compelled to engage in warfare, mere taxation proves insufficient. Here, the utility of modern fiat currency becomes apparent, facilitating the acquisition of resources beyond what a transparent tax rate would permit. Through fiat, the dilatory effects of inflation serve the dual purpose of either being dismissed as unrelated in the event of victory—perhaps offset by the spoils thereof—or, in the case of defeat, rationalized as a war’s consequence. Regardless, the result is the same: a surreptitious expropriation of the populace’s wealth. State-initiated actions, notably famine and war, rank as the foremost causes of human mortality, surpassing even health crises and natural calamities. The inception of the modern fiat system, marked by the establishment of the Bank of England, was explicitly intended for waging war. Indeed, the very creation of the contemporary British Pound was predicated on this bellicose objective. P.S.: Please excuse the grandiloquence of my discourse; consider it a charming anachronism. I hail from the future, having spent several delightful decades marooned in the 1800s. Only recently have I elected to grace the early 2020s with my presence, and it appears my linguistic preferences have yet to acclimatize to the present era’s vernacular. |