In the Beginning...

All good stories usually start here. This is the beginning, or is it? If we are truly going to solve any problems, we must first realize there is a problem, and then seek out the root of that problem. However, as we have often discovered, where we typically think the problem begins is where we first noticed it. However, in this, we are often mistaken.


For instance, we may look upon an instance of theft, and determine the theft was a direct result of one person having what another desired. By this logic, we may also figure this act was brought on by greed. Finding agreement in this notion, we may decide to punish this person for being so greedy. Thus we have prisons and so called correctional institutions.

Similarly, we may determine that all of the bankers and lawyers are also greedy, and thus seek jobs which will offer them the highest reward for the least work. Such a conclusion can easily lead us to believe that not only are some people greedy, but that many are also lazy.

Next, we may examine the lifestyle of those who live on welfare subsistence living. It is really easy to arrive at the conclusion that these people are not as greedy as bankers or lawyers, but are certainly lazy.

So far, all of our observations seem to confirm our suspicions. However, it is important to realize here that we have only conducted the most cursory of examinations, and we have relied solely on intuition for our source of knowledge. These are the types of queries which lead us to such faulty conclusions as the human nature argument.

Further, deeper analysis will reveal that our hypothesis doesn't always hold true. Some people are more altruistic than others, even given the same genetics/parentage.

If our hypothesis were true, we would expect all people to be greedy and lazy. Such is the nature of nature, or more specifically human nature. Nature is what occurs naturally, regardless of environment, or otherwise external influence. So that, a person who is greedy, would, by the human nature argument, have been born that way, the same would be true of laziness.  So, if not all people are born lazy, and or greedy, then these traits do not belong to the human nature argument.

If they are not a part of human nature, then they may be genetic traits. However, if this were true, then we would expect all people of a particular genetic profile to be one, or the other, or both. However, this doesn't hold true either.

Given all that we apparently only thought we know about this phenomenon, is there anything about it we can honestly claim to know? Well, I'm glad you asked. The answer is, yes and no. We do know some things which we have learned in the process of studying this situation as well as several others. We know that at least the vast majority of what influences our behavior in environmentally borne.  This is to say, we are more nurture than nature.

In fact, recent research into epi-genetics would tend to support this notion. It appears that we are so tied to our environmental influences that even our genetics can be remapped according to our surroundings.

If, we are so environmentally influenced, the question asks itself, "How is it some of us are so aggressive, violent, greedy, or lazy?" and, "What, within our environment, could possibly have caused so much aberration?"

Delving ever further into it all, we can see that almost all criminal activity is linked directly or indirectly to money and the monetary system. However, this doesn't really explain, in any detail, why some only steal merchandise, or food products, and others only steal money. After all, if one were to steal enough money, one could purchase those items which are coveted,  brand new, rather than taking them in slightly to very used condition.

However, we could determine that since so much criminal activity is so closely tied to money, and the monetary system, that money itself is to blame for the behavior. This seems to be supported by the following quote from 1 Timothy 6:10, "for a root of all the evils is the love of money, which certain longing for did go astray from the faith, and themselves did pierce through with many sorrows" - Young's literal translation.

However, upon reflection, this approach seems a bit foolish since money has no conscience or will of its own.

So, if it isn't human nature and it isn't money, then what could it possibly be which causes so much aberrant behavior? and, Just exactly how deeply do we need to dig to get at the roots?


Since it would seem that we have traced most crimes to money, perhaps we should stick with that one a while longer. Where does  money come from anyhow, and what purpose does it serve?

Money has long been used as a system of trade convenience. In fact, the precursor was the barter system, of trading goods for goods... the precursor of which was the gift economy. So, let's start there and work our way forward for a little while.

Before Man was Mankind, he was a hominid, or so the story of evolution goes. I, for one, subscribe to this theory. At that time he was no more than a hunter gatherer, who lived in  family groups, or extended families known today as tribes. During those times, food was often scarce. In time, through pattern seeking behaviors we still recognize today, and can recognize in other animals in lab tests, he began to tell time and seasons. He became capable of recognizing certain types of edible food items and this knowledge was passed down through the ages, often by example, and then eventually through communication methods which were gradually improved. Eventually, he became capable of not only harvesting crops of grain, fruits, and vegetables, he also learned to plant and raise these crops and cultivate them. Almost simultaneously, he learned to domesticate animals for food, clothing, shelter and tools.  Previous to this time, we can see examples of what looks a lot like a gift based economy. In this gift economy items are exchanged, but not as a form of direct barter or trade. There is no expectation of immediate reward, or return in kind.

Upon having learned these agrarian traits, Man began to build settlements, which eventually became villages, and then towns. It is during this time that Man, having learned to tame the land and the beasts begins to think more highly of himself. In some cases they could even be said to have seen themselves as rivaling the gods they had so long worshiped. They felt they had dominion, and would claim property rights. Rights which were often defended by brute force when challenged. It is around this time that a system of exchange begins to arise. This system, in many cases is conducted with strangers along trade routes. Strangers who may never be able to repay the customary kindness of the gift economy. Such an economy, in such a system could get quite costly, and so, this new system would require an immediate exchange in kind. Thus the barter system is born.

As civilizations grew, and trade routes got longer and busier, and products became more abundant, it became necessary to lighten the load, as it were. So, a system which seemed beneficial to all parties arose through a process of social agreements. And thus money was born. Or at least some primitive form of it. This new system was so successful that it caught on everywhere. Soon everyone was using this money system of trade and a new business arose. Since some people used differing materials in their coinage, of alternate qualities and quantities, some coinage was quite well lent to melting and re-smelting into an alternate coinage, thus increasing its value amount. So, the money changers were born. This, is who eventually becomes the bankers, by the way. Although they were more like the "Foreign Exchange Commission. " 

So, as we can see, the true root of money is in the sense of ownership, and property. Gift economies didn't have such an idea. In a gift economy it wasn't really possible to own anymore than you could carry. Thus, it was impossible to own land.

This is something of a condensed version of the story, but none the less as accurate as I can currently get in so little space. It is also, perhaps, more accurate than I may really need for my purposes here. The story does vary slightly from location to location, but as generalities go it should serve our needs here. We know as much as we do about gift economies because many still exist to this day in remote corners and pockets of the world. The people who live in these societies, admittedly, live a much simpler and more agrarian lifestyle. They are not very technologically advanced at all. But, these people do live in much greater balance with nature and the natural world around them. They are truly sustainable societies, as evidenced by the fact that they still exist so many thousands of years later, while we, in the "civilized" and technologically advanced world, stand at deaths door.