Two definitions of money, both faith based:

1. The most marketable commodity (the most marketable bc have faith based on its history that it will retain its value)

2. That which the Gov demands in tribute (you have faith if don’t pay your taxes in it the gov will jail you)

1/

One can argue that #2 above...actually leads to Govs fiat money becoming #1 above.

Regardless, all money is ultimately faith based. At their core, they are confidence games.

Once the confidence is gone, regardless of the reason, so is the value of the money/currency.

2/

In this way, money/currency, is very much like a religion.
The more that believe, the stronger it is.
The stronger it is, the longer it lasts.
The longer it lasts, the harder it is to unseat/replace.
It’s like the network effect.

3/

In today’s world, fiat money (#2 above) is clearly the dominant religion...although gold and bitcoin have recently been making inroads and have ardent disciples who stand ready to crucify the heretics and non believers who speak ill of their movement.

4/

And despite theory of emergence of money as natural solution to “double coincidence of wants” problem in Barter economies, historical research actually pts to these barter economies rarely, if ever, actually existing. It’s not to say they couldn’t, just that they haven’t.

5/

Despite notions otherwise, money has historically been whatever the local power authority, warlord, king or elected government has said it was. Maybe it was gold, maybe it was cigarettes, maybe it was paper, maybe it was beads...

6/

Whatever it was, it’s historically been mandated & been enforced by violence. Maybe someday it will change & we’ll be free to pick the money of our choosing. It’s a beautiful dream that I’d very much like to see. But as of today, Money is the fusion of Church (faith) & State.

7/