Commerce or economics?

Economics is commonly defined as, “the branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” This is the definition as it is commonly seen, however, what is economics and would the science exist without state (non tribal/ familial government)? 533224_10201086335734113_466050843_n

Over the past couple of years I have devoted much of my time to studying the history of the mass infatuation with government as a necessary evil. What I have found is that in societies where tribal or familial government only exists people are truly free. Relationships within these social groupings are generally voluntary and the humans involved rarely see war as it is commonly defined. These social groupings do not have economics as a science, rather they have commerce based on whatever is valuable for each involved.

Economics relies on a centralized system or a grouping of systems based around whatever specie or form of currency each state allows to be utilized. Commerce exists throughout both regulated and unregulated social groupings. In every state based economic zone there exists a thriving black market which utilizes many forms of trade mediums. It is within these black market zones that freedom exists, even though that freedom is incredibly dangerous at times. As an individual who does not embrace the state as a needful entity, it is my belief that we do not need centralized economies. Rather as individuals all we “need” is commerce. 21430_10201084074357580_2070317304_n

Trade, barter, silver, gold, seeds, pretty rocks and even digitally generated mediums of trade are all that is necessary. The values of each of these mediums of trade need only be set based on the mutually agreed upon desires of those involved. Bitcoin or “01100010 01101001 01110100 01100011 01101111 01101001 01101110” as it is known in binary is one of these. Its “value” is arbitrary and based solely upon the dollar or “01100100 01101111 01101100 01101100 01100001 01110010” as it is known in binary. While the dollar or pound or euro etc., all have pieces of paper that represent this. However, the intrinsic or natural values of each piece of paper is exactly zero unless someone believes that it represents more and there is an operating electronic storage system to back that up with digitally created values being attached.

There was a time when these paper currencies had two types of metal backing their value up. However, due to the desire of the printers of the money to continue printing it and the very real limitations of the metals involved this fell to the side years ago as means of propping up a currency. Again, this approach still has no natural value alone gold is to soft for tools, and to heavy for other applications. It is used in minute quantities with some electronic applications. Silver can be used in electronic applications and for solar energy generation, however, again as a tool or food it is useless. wpid-IMG_00000390_edit.jpg

It is my belief that economics themselves are useless without the state. In fact, unless you have a centralized system to maintain, monitor and guard it cannot work. However, commerce when applied using true free market approaches remains viable regardless. This of course means we must understand what free market means. Contrary to popular political opinions and the multitude of talking heads that proclaim the negative nature of the same, the definition is, “an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.”

Competition does not breed crime by default, rather it breeds honesty and intellectual growth. Look to the history of the world for proof in this regard. Commerce does the same, unrestricted commerce without state oversight can only lead to true innovation and exponential growth of physical real wealth for all involved. The American Indians prior to their disingenuous uprooting and mass murder by European colonists and American soldiers sent by government had true wealth and freedom. They moved with the food, climate changes and within their unfenced yet mutually agreed upon borders with other tribes. They did not have or need vaccinations or school because their education was based on survival and promoted their thriving as a culture and people.

Crime is caused when laws are made to control others behaviours or benefit a few. Crime is the result of laws and laws exist to support the state. There are people who are bad with regards to their actions or desires towards other people. However, when no state enforcement exists individuals are naturally forced to take responsibility for their own actions and reactions to events that will occur. People will try to force others to do what they want, and to stop that others will need to stand up for themselves. People will still be hungry at times, but to be fed instead they will need to produce their own food or be able to trade something for it from those who do. Assuming that without government we would be awash in crime is to ignore history and the reality of the modern world we live in. Crime is more abundant with government and as a result of government then it ever has been without it. 20130228-222806.jpg

So I ask this question of the thinkers out there. If I say, Commerce or economics? What would you answer and why? I believe that to begin anew we must reject everything that connects with the state, or at least promote alternatives that work. This is why I trade and barter with others, my abilities or product for theirs and so on. Be free, study and understand. More importantly remember, most of what we do and know now is based in the faulty premise that we must have government controlling our decisions, lives and even thoughts. If that is gone, what will really be necessary?

Free the mind and the body will follow.


About Jesse Mathewson

Jesse Mathewson is the author of the popular blog, and provides commentary to many varied places based on a background that includes education in criminal justice, history, religion and even insurgency tactics and tactical training. His current role in his community is as an organizer of sorts and a preacher of community solidarity and agorism. He also runs Liberty Practical Training, a self defense school specializing in the practical applications of defensive approaches versus the theoretical. As an agorist, voluntaryist and atheist his life is seen as crazy and wild by many, though once they get to know him most realize he is a bluntly honest individual who will give you the shirt off his back if he believes it is necessary to help you. Very simple, "That which is voluntary between all individuals involved is always right, if it is not voluntary, it is always wrong."
This entry was posted in Agorism, Authored by Jesse Mathewson, History, Non-Aggression and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Commerce or economics?

  1. Hogeye Bill says:

    Your frivolous definition of “economics” ruins this piece. Economics does not “rely on a centralized system or a grouping of systems based around whatever specie or form of currency each state allows to be utilized.” Quite the contrary, your first definition was right: “The branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” Of course it can exist without a State. In short, your redefinition of “economics” to mean only the taxed unfree part of the economy is contrived.


    • I would say that having someone milk the producers to science out what is obvious to many is a scam. After all, value should not be arbitrary it should be worth versus worth to the mutual benefit of all involved. Hence my disdain for the “science” that is economics. Now, economies as such have not existed outside of state instigated approaches historically. Commerce, yes, economy? Nope


  2. Chip Saunders says:

    That is a distinction I had not previously been astute enough to realize and indentify on my own. Thanks for pointing it out.

    So when speaking with others in the future, I need to endeavor to alter my terms. In stead of using the word “economics” so frequently and without thought, perhaps I should use the term “commerce science”? It doesn’t roll off the tongue as easily, but language needs to be specific.


Comments are closed.