Governments, Money, Capitalism, Scarcity and Stupidity

I’ve never seen a Singularity based explanation of politics, governments, capitalism, or money, therefore I shall explain our current sociopolitical system of economics from a Singularity perspective.

All governments exist due to money. Governments are products of money, governments are social creations based upon capital. All monetary civilizations are capitalist. Capitalism eventually arises whenever a civilization is based on money. Any civilization based on money is a civilization based upon profit and private ownership. Communism in practice has only ever entailed a capitalist modality because the nature of capital, the phenomenon of scarcity entailing wealth imbalance, inevitably entails capitalism, capitalism is inescapable if civilization is based on money. Money is capitalism. Communism can never exist in actuality, it only exists as a deceptive description of capitalism. Usually the communist deception occurs due to unawareness, an ignorance of what money actually is.

Malicious conning, a need to hoodwink people, can also be a motivator for the communist illusion-delusion. Anarcho-capitalism is no different to communism, it is an illusion, it is merely capitalism thus it entails governance, governments. Widespread voluntaryism is likewise impossible in a society based upon money.

Governments are methods for managing money, they are societal creations similar to how money is a societal creation. Management of money is the purpose of all governments. Governments manage money, they manage all the problems of social dysfunction arising from money, it is all about scarcity. Capitalism (money) is a method for governing social interactions thus logically and inevitably an actual government is the consequence of social behaviour mediated via the governing nature of money.

Money is a method of control, it controls the allocation of resources, money governs scarcity of resources. Actual governments are reflections of the inherent governance of social interactions based on capital, wealth, money. Capitalism is all about control. All political systems are about the control of capital. The control of capital logically entails the control of people because people create capital. Consider feudalism, feudalism is another name for capitalism because the purpose of feudalism is to control capital, likewise with tyranny we are again looking at capitalism, the control of capital.

Oddly the term free-market is often mentioned regarding capitalism, the oddity is regarding the incongruity of “free” and “market.” The free market is an oxymoron because markets are the antithesis of freedom.

Money is governance, it governs the allocation of scarce resources, money governs behaviour, thus actual governance, governments, will always arise from monetary interactions when monetary interactions become sufficiently complex. Money is scarcity, money is the consequence of scarcity, thus governments are “scarcity” because governments are essentially money.

All roads lead to Rome. Governments are an inevitable consequence of money because money is all about governing social interactions. Yes the manifestation of simple monetary interactions doesn’t immediately spawn a government but inevitably a government will always arise from monetary interaction. Any resistance to a central banking system is futile due to the nature of what money is. Money is governance thus with sufficient complexity regarding the governing nature of monetary interactions, there will occur a centralized body known as a government. A government can be defined as a level of high monetary complexity. A failure to comprehend the connection between money and governments is comparable to looking at a baby and not seeing how the baby inevitably entails adulthood. Money is the baby which inevitably grows into a government. To expect anything other than a centralized government arising from monetary interaction is tantamount expecting a human baby to become an albatross, an abacus, or a brick.

While money persists capitalism is not merely the best method for social mediation of scarcity, it is the only method for the mediation of scarcity-based interactions, capitalism is an inevitable consequence of scarcity. I recognise capitalism is rubbish, it is abhorrent, it is truly execrable stupidity, but I also see how we don’t yet possess the intelligence to rise above capitalism.

Money, capital, capitalism, governments, and scarcity are all the same phenomena. It is all about a lack of intelligence, a lack of technology, it is all about stupidity. The Singularity (Post-Scarcity) is the opposite of everything we know, it is the opposite of money, the opposite of governments. The Singularity is total freedom, it is the intelligence explosion.

Freedom in the sense of prices is inextricably linked to the libertarian sense of being free. Liberty needs to be constrained when resources are scarce. The existence of prices constrains liberty because scarcity demands the control of people. It is no coincidence liberty has increased in synchronization with increasing abundance. When everything is free in a financial sense people will also be totally free in a libertarian sense because when everyone can have anything they want, free at no cost, there will be no need for the elite to control the masses for profit. Profits will be obsolete.

The alternative to money is Post-Scarcity, which will be achieved via rapid technological evolution entailing ultra-efficient tech, access to limitless Space resources via explosive intelligence.

Some people wrongly think scarcity is an artificial construct but “artificial scarcity” is an oxymoron similar to dry wetness or cold hotness. Artificial scarcity is impossible, it cannot exist. Scarcity cannot be created, it can only be enhanced. If total scarcity does not exist then it cannot be created. The enhancement of scarcity, the emphasis of scarcity, the intensification regarding aspects of scarcity, it will never constitute “artificial scarcity” similar to how one ice-cube added to the Antarctic Ice Sheet is not artificial coldness. Creating artificial scarcity is tantamount to thinking you can create artificial coldness via adding one ice-cube to the Sun.

Post-Scarcity is the Singularity, it cannot be stopped or ended but it can be delayed or accelerated, furthermore there is only one Singularity and it has not already happened, the Singularity is not an iPhone. When it happens there will be no doubt about its occurrence because things such as money, capitalism, crime, governments, mortality, disease, misunderstanding, or the need to write words, all these things will be obsolete artifacts from a bygone era of stupidity.


32 Responses

  1. wawin says:

    the goal of e-rupiah project is to remove money scarcity in the society

  2. Samantha Atkins says:

    Money is a fungile medium of value exchange between people. It hasn’t a damn thing to do with greed or control or anything else in and of itself. A free market is freedom applied to economic activities. That is all coercion, all non-voluntary interaction is forbidden in the economic sphere. This largely means keeping government out of economics. The anarcho-capitalist position is a variant and purest formulation of this idea. But any form of monarchism that prohibits government from economic manipulation does, in theory, much the same.

    You don’t see communism because it is based on fundamentally false and unworkable principles. It is tremendously different from and in many ways opposite from free markets and anarcho-capitalism.

    Money is not a method of control. It is a means of quantization of value. This is not at all the same thing. Capitalism cannot both be the best means of dealing the reality, including relative scarcity, and be “rubbish” and “abhorrent”. Make up your mind.

    The Singularity is not about some automatic utopia beyond all want and need and with infinite milk and honey of all kinds in utterly unimaginable quantities of all beings. If you want something to critique then critique this neo-mystical doctrine you keep spouting.

    Please bother to learn what terms mean before you engage in such empty verbiage.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Dear Samantha, you are not the first to point out the apparent contradiction regarding my detestation of capitalism and the recognition of capitalism currently not merely being the best system but it is actually the only system for managing scarcity.

      Here is what I have stated elsewhere:

      Imagine you are stuck on planet full of dog poop, and there is no escape until you invent a space rocket, thus in the meantime you must build your civilization on poop, but despite it being the best civilization you can build, you nevertheless see how it is poop, it is founded upon poop.

      So, it’s about making the best of a bad situation; you realise you are doing the best you can with your limited capabilities while simultaneously seeing how your best is atrocious. Is this really so contradictory?

      I think the Singularity is an automatic utopia although the route there could be very painful. Utopia is inevitable, in the long term, due to the nature of what intelligence is, intelligence will lead to the abolition of scarcity. The universe is much bigger than the parochial limitations of Earth regarding our primitive 2013 technology, there is more than enough room for intelligence to expand to colossal proportions entailing super-efficient intelligence and super-efficient utilisation of resources. Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries give us a glimmer of the potential our universe holds, thus you can see, with not too much imagination, how utopia is inevitable.

      Money is all about scarcity, which is all about control. Scarcity (money) is all about the regulation of scarce items. Scarcity is the reason why prices rise. The greater the scarcity the more control (regulation, limitation) is needed regarding the scarce item, thus we see how governments inevitably arise as control mechanisms mirroring the controlling-regulatory nature of money.

      • Carlos says:


        I slightly agree with the criticisms above, regarding that it is a poor article. The article could be a little better and have some sources so people can search more on specific topics you speak of. I think you would agree most people reading this need detailed explanations, and even so it won’t be enough to let go of old paradigms…

        For example, I think you should redirect most of the people I see commenting in your article – who clearly don’t understand what you are saying – to Ray Kurzweil’s material.

        I also see here lots of the commonly socially accepted (erroneous) assumptions, especially regarding “human nature”. Our whole society and culture is based in false and erroneous assumptions perpetuated through out ages, one of them being this: “In general, people are not good. They are lazy, greedy, and stupid.” . I have no space to go on details about this here, but a simple search in google for “The myth of human nature” should point you on the rigth way.


  3. James says:

    This is a rant, with no premises, no inferences, and no conclusions. It’s a string of breathless assertions, and bears no resemblance to an argument or an essay. The anonymous author has no grasp of capitalism, government, freedom, and suffers from a bad case of junior high school pseudo-intellectual speak. If you want to see what a rigorous liberal arts education can do, look away. This author never endured an education, and never learned to write.

    But that’s not even the problem. This juvenile nonsense is everywhere. The problem is why is it in H+ magazine? If transhumanism were a widely respected movement, known to adhere to reasonable intellectual standards, with a bright future ahead, it might be able to let its guard down from time to time and publish crap. But it isn’t and it shouldn’t.

  4. William says:

    Money is a comodity, nothing more. Like wheat or more traditionally gold. Goverment controlled money (the modernn fiat currencies we see around us) are not created by a free market but by the state. The state uses coersion to create a monopoly for its currency. As a result of this, any market you could point to today is by definition NOT free. Money is not coersive, the guns of the state are. As long as the state exists, there will not be a free market.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Hello William, money is the abstract value of all commodities, it is the abstract value of any commodity within a scarcity situation. Money is a product of scarcity, it is a method to value and control scarce resources. Elsewhere (in comment and in the body of my article we are considering) I have stated the State is an inevitable product of the market. Money and the guns of the State are essentially the same thing, money leads to the State. As long as money exists the State will always arise.

      • William says:

        So in a post scarcity scenario, how will voluntary transactions be handled, if not in some form of commonly accepted currency? I do not believe money leads to the state, but that as long as society continues to accept the illogical notion that giving a monopoly of force to a small group of people to regulate them, there will always be the state and it will always increase in size and coersive power until it consumes its host population.

        • Singularity Utopia says:

          William, in a Post-Scarcity scenario there will be no need for any transactions because everyone will be totally self-sufficient. When everything is free, easily accessible by each individual, there is absolutely no need to currency.

          Scarcity means an elite group of people will control the majority. This is typical behaviour in animals, it is not unique to humans. People who don’t have the wherewithal to become a dominant leader will resent the State, but perhaps via their ingenuity they can rise in the hierarchy; their objections however, to the State, do not mean the State is illogical, is it actually very logical to dominate others in a scarcity situation because greater wealth generally entails greater survival via better access to healthcare, better diet, the ability to avoid the telomere-shortening impact of stress-induced poverty.

          Of course looking at the situation intelligently we see there is a better solution than crude dominance but the problem is people can’t generally look at the situation intelligently.

  5. Someone says:

    I do not think this article is well thought as it relies in a system of ideas: the ideas of Singularity which I suppose is only one. There cannot be many Singularities, am I wrong?

    So, The Singularity is the answer to all of our prayers? Re-read/write (last paragraph) Post-Scarcity is the Singularity. Things such as money, capitalism, crime, governments, mortality, disease, misunderstanding, or the need to write words, all these things will be obsolete artifacts from a bygone era of stupidity.

    The Borg was here to remind you, resistance is futile!

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Previously, co-authored with Nikki Olson, I wrote about “Itsy-Bitsy-Teeny-Weeny-Singularities” here on H+, so William you can see I have clear ideas about there being only one Singularity.

      There is nothing magical about the Singularity, it is merely technology, albeit extreme technology, utterly EXTREME. The reason why people think an iPhone could be the Singularity, their idea that there could be multiple Singularities, is because they misunderstand the extreme level of technological advancement we are considering. Each tiny technological step forward does provide a minor revolution, but we are not considering minor technological revolutions such as the iPhone, we are considering an utter major event, where the world totally changes beyond all recognition, it is an event comparable to humans initially evolving intelligence, it is the creation of a new intelligent species of a magnitude in degree comparable kittens or puppies contrasted with humans, thus human minds post-Singularity will be similar to to how we currently view the minds of kittens or puppies, the world will be very singular (strange).

      Technology is the answer to all our “prayers” (but I don’t pray, I am an atheist thus instead of the “prayers” idiom I’d say “problems”). There is no shame regarding technology answering all our problems, there is actually very good evidence regarding technology being able to answer our problems. Technology allows us to communicate almost instantly with anyone around the world, technology saves lives in countless ways from mere antibiotics to cures for AIDS (so far only two people have been cured) or we can regenerate, regrow, organs without any organ donor, merely by using the patients own stem cells thereby preventing organ rejection. We can create mechanical hearts, we can create artificial arms which are rapidly approaching the sensitivity of real arms-hands. Technology regarding farming allows us to avoid starvation. Electricity and gas allows us to heat our homes. There are many aspects, all aspects, where technology has not reached its peak thus despite technological advances regarding medicine or farming, people die from disease or starvation. The Singularity is the point of total technological proficiency, extreme proficiency, whereby we cure all disease and farming reaches a level of supreme technological skill to that nobody will ever be hungry again, it is the attainment of limitless proficiency. Technology has continually provided greater abundance, thus you don’t need to be a member of the aristocracy today to own an pocket computer, a smartphone, because we see how abundance has made goods cheaper. Abundance will progress to the point where Post-Scarcity is attained thus everything will be free, which is a very singular situation.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Whoops, regarding the person I was responding to, I appear to have mistakenly entered the wrong name regarding my last reply. Instead of mentioning “William” I was actually responding to someone who is using the name “Someone.”

      My reply in question starts: “Previously, co-authored with Nikki Olson…”

  6. sidhe3141 says:

    This really seems like a poorly-thought-out bit of obvious pseudo-sociology. Why does the existence of capital imply capitalism? The Pre-Columbian First Nations would tend to disagree with that statement. Why does the existence of money make government necessary? “Money” is just that which a society has decided holds value as a medium of exchange; it does not follow from “widgets have value assigned by society in excess of their utility” that “a regulatory body must exist”. How can you know that there will be no crime past the Singularity? A singularity is by definition a point past which you cannot make predictions.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Dear sidhe3141, note the section where I stated “Money is governance thus with sufficient complexity regarding the governing nature of monetary interactions, there will occur a centralized body known as a government. A government can be defined as a level of high monetary complexity.” I also stated “Yes the manifestation of simple monetary interactions doesn’t immediately spawn a government but inevitably a government will always arise from monetary interaction.”

      The reason why governments arise is because the nature and purpose of money is about about governing the allocation of scarce resources, thus when sufficient financial complexity arises, when a primitive monetary society becomes sufficient rich, a government will naturally, logically, arise, because money is all about control. In primitive societies of minimal wealth the governance is administered in a very basic manner via each individual or a few individual ensuring other people abide by the law of money, but with greater wealth, greater population, it becomes difficult for individuals to agree on governance, thus leaders arise, a minority is needed to control and guide the majority. Greater wealth means there is also greater incentive to become a dominant leader, a member of the government, the power elite, thus naturally due to greater wealth entailing greater survival, a minority of prime survivors will consolidate their power via a government, monarchy, etc. This is a natural consequence of scarcity, it is a natural consequence of money. Greater wealth-power = greater survival, thus we have a situation of leadership, which we call the government. Scarcity makes survival uncertain therefore everyone wants access to scarce resources. Money controls the scarce resources and governments control the money. Scarcity is all about the need for control.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Crime hinges upon scarcity. Consider the perilous situation of scarcity combined with the pressures and cruelty of inevitable governmental controls, this causes social dysfunction, people become unbalanced, or putting it another way: criminals merely want to seize by force a greater amount of a scarce resource, people feel powerless in a scarcity situation thus they sometimes turn to crime at least one of two reasons. One to decrease their fearsome scarcity predicament in a material sense, to gain crude wealth. Or two they create a comforting illusion of power via working outside the system, via transcending the rules, the controls of scarcity, criminals create an illusion of freedom when they disregard the social controls of scarcity, it is illusory psychological currency, a valuable sense of psychological freedom in an unfree world of scarcity. Scarcity of intelligence is the biggest factor regarding crime, which will be remedied by the intelligence explosion.

      It is easy to predict the Singularity (intelligence explosion) will entail no crime. Intelligence will always be intelligent despite any possible unknown extreme technological evolution.

  7. Neil King says:

    Ps in order to facilitate the end of the authors own era of stupidity I recommend A Beautiful Anarchy by Jeffrey Tucker. This book is logical, defines its concepts properly, is Harvard referenced etc etc.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      The only way to truly “end intellectual dependency on the state” is to create or accelerate the arrival of Post-Scarcity. I am familiar with anarchy. Anarchy in a monetary age is an illusion, it is an attractive illusion but it is most certainly an illusion. Sir Herbert Read was an anarchist, but a mere knightly title or a validation via Harvard does not make a premise true, logically valid.

  8. Neil King says:

    This article is ill informed nonsense (surprised to see it on H+). It wouldn’t even pass an AS level Sociology exam in the UK. Just one point among many ( I work for a living and haven’t got enough time) is that anything Post singularity is by definition un-knowable so these post scarcity predictions must be invalid. Who was the author??? Why don’t they own up to this!

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      I will be publishing a Complete Singularity Guide soon, Neil King. I think the “unknowable” definition of the Singularity is wrong. Neologisms need to be refined, and I will do this. The Singularity term is relatively new, it needs to be refined.

  9. hee hee ! Cat fight !!
    Love the article and all its logic !

  10. Sebastian says:

    A rather arrogant article. Full of circular statments and with no theorical backbone to support what it’s been proposed. It reads more like a sermon of a church than a paper exposing an earth shattering new philosophy.

    • James says:

      I completely agree, Sebastian. There’s no substance at all to this article and I think your analogy to a sermon is most apt. I read the title and thought I was in for an interesting argument with an intense discussion ensuing. I hate the inconsistency of h+ articles.

      • Singularity Utopia says:

        James, read my comment to Sebastian, it also applies to you.

        Instead of comparing myself (an atheist) to a religious person via the “sermon” categorisation, which to me smacks heavily of trolling, I think it would be more productive if you asked for clarification regarding the points you are unsure about, the points you may disagree with. I can then explain my reasoning in greater detail.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      Was I really being arrogant Sebastian? I actually thought I was being modest.

      I don’t think my statements are circular but they could appear to be so, due to misunderstanding regarding the logical linkage of concepts previously illogically assumed to be disparate in varying degrees.

      The theoretical backbone is “logic,” which is a very sturdy backbone, it is about actually thinking about things. The logic could be expanded but I prefer brevity, which allows intelligent people to read between the lines, instead of forcing people to suffer painfully long waffling.

      “Theory” should not blindly mean the citation of various sociological studies or a consensual validation via quotation. The evidence of my theory is before our eyes, it depends upon intelligence, it depends upon thinking logically instead of acting upon assumptions.

      Your church sermon assertion seems to be ad hominem, or guilt by association. It is or it should be known I am a staunch atheist. if you did actually know I’m a vigorous atheist your “church” aspersion could actually be trolling.

  11. adam says:

    i can’t put my finger on it, but you seem to be missing something fundamental in your understanding of political philosophy. for example, a free market is not an oxymoron…it describes a market *free* from central planning. it operates by people, collectively or individually, *freely* trading capital, so that the prices for goods and services accurately reflect the value people put on those things. the alternative, centrally planned markets, is explicitly less free because non-unanimous dictates control prices and allocation of resources. when people say “free” in a political context they mean free from coercion, not free stuff handed to them…

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      My point, adam, is that if you understand the nature of what markets are you will see central planning is a fundamental aspect of the market. It all begins with money, money is the core central planning, it is the central mode of control regarding the nature of scarcity, money is a control system to mediate scarcity, thus from the core control of money, a situation where things cost money, a situation where things are not free, you can see free trading of capital is a mere illusion. So-called “freedom” in a situation where things are not free is so insignificant it is thus essentially irrelevant, which means attempts to create freedom contrary to scarcity entail a parody of freedom or the freedom will be temporary thus the illusory free-market, the illusory freedom, quickly shatters to the natural state of the unfree market. The market, any market, is not based on free-trading, it isn’t based upon freedom, it is based upon control, control of scarcity. Freedom is contrary to the market. Freedom increases directly in proportion to the decrease of the market.

      The word “free” is about liberty and liberty is linked to prices, liberty is linked to decreasing scarcity, thus goods move closer to being to being free in synchronisation with increasing liberty. When scarcity is very severe liberty must be constricted to ensure greater profits for elite individuals. The constraint of liberty happens to ensure compliance with higher prices, liberty is constrained to ensure people do not rebel against the higher prices, thus you see free is a word applicable simultaneously to both prices and libertarianism, but people typically do not see the interconnection, the interdependence, between financial and libertarian freedom.

  12. Jer says:

    Nice piece. I wish that it were so.
    Unfortunately, it is too simple and does not take into account sociology or psychology.
    In general, people are not good. They are lazy, greedy, and stupid. Though they are not necessarily evil, but they crave to do less for more without thinking about how to overcome this. If, in a post-scarcity world you have 2 people and 3 doughnuts, and the people can only need or want one, one of the two people will take 2 and the second person will then, and only then, crave the taken doughnut, even though he is in possession of the one donut that he only desires, wants, and needs. Only technology has allowed people to thrive and advance despite these flaws, based on how technology can push people along a type of meritocracy without them knowing it. Convenience, wealth, and instant knowledge has come at very little cost, usually exceeding expectations. Further, it is only the application of civility (in the form of education and exposure to other cultures) constantly applied and over-applied that painfully and slowly these flaws are somewhat overcome with government’s help, with the majority benefit from technology’s gifts. All is not lost. Lack of scarcity is not the only answer (for what is it? american middle class/ european middle class? when does one feel no scarcity) it is the pushing of technology which improves society, but under cover of convenience and enjoyment (i.e. electrical big and fast cars). It is not a deception, but a fulfilling of the basic humanity. The end result, not overtly (but covertly) planned, will be post-scarcity.

    • Singularity Utopia says:

      In the Post-Scarcity world there is an infinity of doughnuts, thus all greed can be accommodated.

      • Jer says:

        “…In the Post-Scarcity world there is an infinity of doughnuts, thus all greed can be accommodated….”
        Sounds good.
        I would agree if there was only one person in that post-scarcity society. As soon as you have two, then they will only validate their individual existence by having one more than the other. Unfortunately, not even infinity is enough doughnuts when each person’s happiness equals ‘me = other + 1’. Cynical? perhaps, but my point is you must quench their desires for scarce items before allowing the items to be non-scarce. We need a condition to occur before post-scarcity – that is a hyper-civility where people are so consumed by their personal non-scarce goals/ accomplishments that they fundamentally don’t require items to be non-scarce, which then makes the items of low value and thus non-scarcity can occur. This is the initial condition to post-scarcity. Appears to be a conflict or recurring loop, i agree. But it is more a psychological intangibility than an economic ‘item’. Trying to define it further would be like defining ‘wisdom’. A type of non-material self-actualization, i suppose is close.

        • Singularity Utopia says:

          Dear Jer, what if they both have infinity, how can one person have more infinity than another?

          Intelligence will solve these hypothetical problems but intelligence hinges upon freedom not upon controls to enforce civility. Civility is a scarcity based concept but this does not mean PS people will be uncivil, it simply means civility like money will be irrelevant because everything will be free, free to be intelligent. The future is a place of total limitlessness.

  13. …Aka…how to avoid getting a job. In conditions of surplus or scarcity, with and without options for education; people still need to have a purpose, to work and have a sense of self, identity, and propriety. And they will still have beliefs that are based on decisions arising from identity, rather than evidence. Try and argue about why someone should be a fan of a particular soccer club. Try telling someone they must believe in a certain political party. People will always, to a degree get pissed off if you tell them what to do or that they must do something. They would rather be ignorant and arbitrary than faceless indistinct slaves.
    The singularity is, deep down, the technocratic capitalist’s wet dream. It is capitalist, and piggish to suggest that the only principle supporting the creation and survival of government is money. There is nothing wrong with money, only how efficient it is in distributing value. There is nothing wrong with propriety or ambition. And, it is wrong to judge stupidity given it is a condition without choice. Ignorance in my opinion is most abhorent.
    The ‘singularity’, from my perspective, is a veiled form of technological dictatorship and has no evidence or merit better than L. Ron Hubbard’s Scientology, or the various rewards offered in the afterlives of man. To me, the singularity even as an idea is despicable and terrifying.

Leave a Reply

buy windows 11 pro test ediyorum