"[during] the last 5,000 years of human history (...). Credit systems seem to arise, and to become dominant, in periods of relative social peace, across networks of trust, whether created by states or, in most periods, transnational institutions, whilst precious metals replace them in periods characterised by widespread plunder. Predatory lending systems certainly exist at every period, but they seem to have had the most damaging effects in periods when money was most easily convertible into cash."
Durant les 5000 dernières années de l'histoire humaine, les systèmes de crédit semblent se développer, et devenir dominant, dans les périodes de relative paix sociale, au travers de réseaux de confiance, qu'il soient créés par les Etats ou, dans la plupart des périodes, par des institutions transnationales, tandis que les métaux précieux les remplacent dans les périodes caractérisées par de fréquents pillages.
"(...) Historically, as we have seen, ages of virtual, credit money have also involved creating some sort of overarching institutions - Mesopotamian sacred kingship, Mosaic jubilees, Sharia or Canon Law - that place some sort of controls on the potentially catastrophic social consequences of debt. Almost invariably, they involve institutions (usually not strictly coincident to the state, usually larger) to protect debtors. So far the movement this time has been the other way around: starting with the '80s we have begun to see the creation of the first effective planetary administrative system, operating through the IMF, World Bank, corporations and other financial institutions, largely in order to protect the interests of creditors. However, this apparatus was very quickly thrown into crisis, first by the very rapid development of global social movements (the alter-globalisation movement), which effectively destroyed the moral authority of institutions like the IMF and left many of them very close to bankrupt, and now by the current banking crisis and global economic collapse. While the new age of virtual money has only just begun and the long term consequences are as yet entirely unclear, we can already say one or two things. The first is that a movement towards virtual money is not in itself, necessarily, an insidious effect of capitalism. In fact, it might well mean exactly the opposite. For much of human history, systems of virtual money were designed and regulated to ensure that nothing like capitalism could ever emerge to begin with - at least not as it appears in its present form, with most of the world's population placed in a condition that would in many other periods of history be considered tantamount to slavery. The second point is to underline the absolutely crucial role of violence in defining the very terms by which we imagine both ‘society' and ‘markets' - in fact, many of our most elementary ideas of freedom."
La première chose est que le mouvement vers la monnaie virtuelle n'est pas nécessairement, en soi, un effet insidieux du capitalisme. En fait, cela pourrait bien signifier exactement le contraire. Le plus souvent durant l'histoire humaine, les systèmes de monnaie virtuelle ont été conçus et régulés pour s'assurer que rien comme le capitalisme puisse jamais se produire – du moins pas tel qu'il apparaît à présent, avec la plus grande part de la population mondiale tenue dans une condition qui serait considérée équivalente à de l'esclavage dans de nombreuses autres périodes de l'histoire.