Comment on Not FC but probably true

<- View Parent
iamtanmay@wolfballs.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

Yeah, if you define Crediticism like that, its the core of Capitalism from the start. Barter of hard assets like grain and gold goes back to cavemen. But Capitalist private production, free from state interference, did not exist till Industrial revolution, 18th Century. Ooga and Booga could trade, but were subject to the King. Meanwhile, fiat existed in Ancient Egypt. Credit is way older, possibly back to cavemen. Abstract assets came in 13th Century.

Capitalism was born when these concepts were mature and practiced for centuries and millennia. Its necessarily tangled in them from birth. You can untangle them yourself and only trade hard assets. That is a subset of "Crediticism". A famous example were Ebayers who traded a pin all the way to a house.

I am sure Indian trannies cover intersex and transsex. Locally they are called Hijras or "6". I don't know if I saw a Eunuch, because I don't know how they look. China had royal Eunuchs, but AFAIK, Indian kingdoms did not have equivalents. The system makes sense, but it didn't catch on outside of China AFAIK.

source
Sort:hotnewtop