JCT: One of the greatest analogies demonstrating the use of
money as hypnotic medium was written 20 years ago by Dick
Racey <rac@...> who has since improved on it!!! The
best got better so enjoy:

*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
MONEY IN A NEW LIGHT
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
by
Dick Racey

*/*/*/*/
Synopsis
*/*/*/*/
The use of money has psychological ramifications that no
textbook on Economics ever mentions. By and large, we don't know
what money IS; we learn about it by experiencing what it DOES.
Its influence over us is so ingrained, however, that we can't
"step back far enough" from ourselves to really detect the nature
and origins of the tentacles money wraps around our psyches. We
know about as much about money as a fish knows about a muddy
river - a fish that spends a lifetime immersed in its murky
waters, never daring to imagine any other "reality."

The purpose of this essay is to develop an understanding of
money, not by poring over textbook definitions, but by hypotheti-
cally performing a cruel experimCX Xent on fellow primates to see
what "human-like" behaviour we might induce in them. As a by-
product of the experiment, we might develop a better understan-
ding of our own behaviour - as an essential first step in CHAN-
GING it.

*/*/*/*/*/*/
Introduction
*/*/*/*/*/*/

For all practical intents and purposes, mankind is ruled by money or
by the lack of it.

In today's world, we can't get very far without money. We
need it for food, clothing, shelter - all the basic necessities
of life. In today's industrial societies, we may also need it for
transportation to and from work, for an occasional theatre
ticket, and maybe an occasional beer. We need money, as well, for
interest and taxes, recognizing that much of the former is
disguised as the latter. To survive, we must have an income. That
income may come from investments, or from government programs
such as unemployment insurance or welfare. Most of us work for a
living, and our income comes in the form of a pay cheque every
couple of weeks. Regardless of how we get it, we need it to live.

If we're in business, we need money for somewhat different
reasons - to start up, to operate, and, if things go well, to
expand, or to lobby for legislation favourable to our business.
If we don't have enough, we have to borrow from lenders, or to
dilute our own interest in our business by offering shares to
others. These all demand compensation - in the form of either
interest or dividends.

Governments need money to provide essential services:
sanitation, education, health care, welfare, roads and airports
and harbour facilities - and, according to some opinion, to
provide many services that we could well do without. Governments
can, of course, CREATE money by printing it; but as a rule they
borrow just like individuals or businesses in order, they say, to
eliminate the threat of inflation. Governments then change the
name of the interest they pay lenders, calling it instead
"taxes," then add it to the unitemized tax bill they send us.

Money is of such compelling interest that, in desperation,
we have been known to resort to theft, fraud, extortion, and an
occasional murder in order to maintain our supply of "spending
money." Some of us "invest" a portion of our pay cheques in
lotteries, clinging to the slim but tantalizing hope that we may
be in a position to tell the boss, "Take this job and shove it!"

Alas, so much for the obvious. But, after recognizing the
absolute necessity of money at all levels of society, the ques-
tion arises: What IS Money? And, more importantly, what accounts
for its powerful grip upon our minds?

Of course, we can refer to textbooks on Economics to
provide answers. These texts inform us that money is (a) a medium
of exchange, (b) a measure of value, (c) a means of discharging
debt, and (d) a "store-house of value." But, having accepted
these definitions, or "functional attributes," are we any wiser?

As a rule, we don't need to be told what money IS. Since we
use it every day of our lives, we "know" what it is without
necessarily being able to define it. We don't "learn" about money
in the same way we "study" history or algebra; we "absorb" our
knowledge from the attitudes of others, and from the direct
impact it has upon our lives. Thus, much of our "knowledge" of
money may be unarticulated; but this really doesn't matter
because we know that money is something we need in order to
survive and function, and that it doesn't grow on trees. Money is
a "reality of life" to which we have grown accustomed; it is
something like a familiar old rock that we pass by on our way to
work, but don't take much notice of.

But even an "old rock" can have surprises - if it is viewed
in a different light. When certain kinds of rock are placed
beneath ultraviolet light, their appearance changes. They begin
to glow. This reveals the presence of minerals that are invisible
to the naked eye viewing it under "ordinary light." It may still
be the "same old rock," but we know more about it than we did
before.

So, while not forgetting about the conventional definitions
of money to be found in the textbooks, let's look at money in a
NEW light.

*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
Money - in a DIFFERENT Light
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/

With that objective in mind, let us pretend, for this
chapter anyway, that we have abandoned our present employment, if
any, and have instead donned the white frock coats and the
spectacles of animal behaviourists. With our extremities thus
protected from the elements, our motives thoroughly disguised in
an air of bland, benign inscrutability as befits our new calling,
let us look at money through new spectacles.

Of course, we would need animals to experiment upon. Chim-
panzees would be ideal because of their intelligence, their
manual dexterity, their structural similarity to human beings,
and, above all, because of the uninhibited manner in which they
habitually give forthright expression to feelings which we, as
human beings, in upholding our traditions of both dignity and
hypocrisy, would rather conceal.

For our purposes, chimpanzees born and raised in captivity
wouldn't do. The chimpanzee born in captivity is but a pale
shadow of the chimpanzee born, raised, and matured in its natural
environment. In the wild, the chimpanzee retains its
individuality, and is a member of a primitive society, a
loosely-knit and shifting hierarchy built upon the authority of
the dominant males, the "ruling class" of chimpdom.

An experiment in the "fiscal management of the chimpanzee"
would certainly involve a preparatory period of study among the
chimpanzees in their natural habitat, to provide a baseline for
future comparison. Their feeding, sleeping, and mating habits
would be studied in great detail, as would be their social
structure. The dominant males, from whom the lines of authority
flow, would be identified, as would every member of the band in a
descending order of authority and influence. Very close personal
relationships are common in chimpanzee society - among friends,
within the family, and especially between a mother and her
offspring. All of these relationships would be jotted down in
our field notebooks, and, as a starting point for our experiment,
we would have a "Who's Who" social registry of our band of
unsuspecting chimps.

Individual chimps in their native habitat enjoy a direct,
unconditional relationship with the environment. Each is econom-
ically independent, gathering its own food requirements from the
available nuts, berries, insects, and for meat, an occasional
small monkey. They have even devised "tools," which they fre-
quently use to feed upon underground insects, poling a blade of
grass down the underground passages of termites. Often, they
climb into trees as a complete social unit in order to feed.
After a day's work, each chimp fashions a bed of leaves in the
fork of a tree-branch, and goes peacefully to sleep. A dull,
prosaic life, perhaps - but without ulcers.

For our experiment, we would need an appropriate setting.
For this purpose, a concrete pad would be constructed in the
jungle - atop which we would erect tall concrete walls of twenty
or so feet in height, inward-leaning to render impossible any
attempt at escape. In one wall we would install a screen of one-
way glass, to facilitate observation from outside the compound.
Where convenient, we would install sleeping platforms, where the
chimps could rest from their daily exertions. Once inside the
compound, the only remaining evidence of a "prior existence"
would be the occasional rustling of leaves in nearby trees.

Our initial period of observation completed, we would then
entice the chimps inside the compound with generous feedings of
bananas, one of their favourite foods. Conceivably, it might
take a few weeks to thoroughly acclimatize the chimpanzees to
their new surroundings. But, one day, when we were sure that all
the chimps were gathered inside the walls, we would snap the
gates shut, trapping them inside.

A New Life Inside the Walls
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*

At first we would feed the chimps in the normal manner with
vitamin-protein-enriched bananas, nutritionally sound in every
respect. We would simply throw bananas over the wall of the
compound several times a day, making sure that each chimp had
plenty to eat.

We would then unveil the coin-operated banana-dispensing
machines installed in one of the compound walls. For our pur-
poses, they might be identical with those frequently found in
company lunchrooms, tier upon tier of small glass windows, their
contents plainly visible through the glass. When the correct coin
was inserted in an adjacent slot, a glass window would unlock and
a chimpanzee could reach inside for his banana. To vary the diet
later on in the experiment, we could supplement the bananas with
fruit and nuts gathered from the surrounding area, thereby
conferring upon the chimpanzees a minimal "freedom of choice" in
their luncheon fare.

Next, we would demonstrate the use of plastic poker chips
which would thereafter serve as "currency" for the chimps.
Because of their intelligence, the chimps might be expected to
master the intricacies of the banana-dispensing machines very
quickly, and it might even be a lot of fun for them pushing the
plastic coins into the slots and extracting the bananas.

After the chimps had mastered the use of the plastic chips,
we would cease feeding them in the normal manner. Instead of
throwing bananas over the wall at feeding time, would instead
throw plastic chips into the compound, and the chimps would
thereafter "purchase" their nutrition through the vending ma-
chines.

After a few weeks, the chimps should have become thoroughly
familiar with the use of the plastic currency, and it would then
be time to introduce the concept of "work." For this purpose, we
would install bicycle exercisers, just like those found in health
club gymnasiums - one for each adult chimp and one for each
adolescent chimp of "working age." Learning to pedal the machines
would probably not take the chimps very long; after all, the
chimp has been trained successfully to ride bicycles and motor-
cycles, and even to negotiate city traffic. A simple exerciser
should be child's play even to the dimmest of chimps.

Inevitably, however, the exercisers might be expected to
lose their initial attraction for the chimps, in all probability
a little bored with the experiment thus far. Once the novelty has
worn off, the next step would be to install the plastic chip
dispensers on the handlebars of each machine. The exercisers
would be controlled remotely from behind the one-way glass to
deliver one plastic chip after a given distance pedalled, say,
two miles. From behind the screen we would also control, quite
arbitrarily, the distance required on each of the machines to
deliver a plastic chip. We would also be able to control the
resistance offered by each machine to the act of pedalling, and
thereby the energy required of the chimp in pedalling a pre-
determined distance.

We might leave it to the chimps themselves to discover that
the machines would eject a plastic chip into a receiving tray,
immediately after a little red light above the receiving tray
began to flash. We might expect the chimps to discover all by
themselves that a two-mile pedal would earn them a plastic chip,
with which they could buy a banana. A few of the duller chimps
might require a little extra time to master this idea; but in a
short while we might expect the chimps to discover that chips
didn't grow on trees. When we were satisfied that each and every
chimp had internalized a rudimentary form of the Protestant
Ethic, we could proceed to the next stage of the experiment.

We would gradually reduce the number of chips thrown over
the wall at feeding time, so that the chimps would have to earn
more and more their own livelihood. After a few weeks, we could
make them completely dependent upon their "earnings."

By this time, the chimps would have completed their "hi-
storical development." Whereas human society has progressed from
Hunting and Gathering through agricultural stages of development,
we would have forced the chimps to jump from the initial stage
directly to the final stage. We would have made the chimps com-
pletely dependent upon money for their access to the environment,
and, as experimenters, we would be in a position to control the
chimps' access - through the instrumentality of the plastic chip.
Our role would then take on some of the characteristics of the
Governor of a Central Bank. For that reason, we would project an
image of benign inscrutability to the chimps, never allowing the
facade to fail even while swatting flies.

An additional period of observation would be required to
establish equitable "work norms" for each of the chimpanzees.
Each of the chimps would be rated as to its capacity, so that an
eight-hour day at the machine would result in sufficient chips
to keep it fit and healthy, in none too fat. When a chimp changed
exercisers, its "rating" would travel with it, and the machine's
resistance and the"distance required" would be adjusted accor-
dingly.

The experiment thus far might well have induced some changes
in the original social hierarchy. The dominant males, for ex-
ample, might not necessarily be the hardest workers. The utility
and effectiveness of their charging displays might have less
effect within the compound than they had formerly had outside -
particularly if the chimps at the lower end of the social scale
happened to notice that the charging displays were having no
effect whatsoever upon the operation of the exercisers or upon
the banana dispensers. The prestige of the dominant males might
suffer as a result. Would, for example, the females raise their
rosy pink rumps to them as preferentially as before?

After several weeks, the chimps, complete realists, would
probably have adjusted to their new environment and working
conditions, or at least would have accepted the situation with as
much stoic philosophy as a chimp can muster. When the adjustment
process was complete we would be in a position to simulate the
highs and lows of the "business cycle" of which economists are so
fond. Alienated from their natural environment, the chimps' sole
link with what was once "theirs for the taking" would be US. The
chimps would be completely at our tender mercies.

Now the experiment could be pressed in earnest, and we might
then commence the task of evoking "human-like" emotion among the
chimps by the application of fiscal and monetary policies of
various kinds. We would not, of course, consult the "poor dumb
animals" concerning their economic destinies. After all, the
animals would have the advantage of working in a "free economy."
The chimps would, in effect, be ready for their first economic
depression.

The Depression
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/

We would introduce the Depression in stages. The first week,
we would "de-activate" one exerciser from behind the one-way
screen, locking its pedals to simulate a shutdown at a factory or
a mine. How would the affected chimp react? Its livelihood gone,
what would its next step be? To "beg" for chips from the others -
perhaps by deferential grooming? To intimidate others, displacing
them from their exercisers? To work part-time on idle machines?
Would there be any noticeable change in the attitude of other
chimps toward it? We would record the results.

The second week, we would increase the "mileage required"
on all the remaining exercisers by ten percent - to simulate the
extra work that factory managers have been known to expect when
market conditions are tight, and when jobs are scarce.

The third week, we could disable another exerciser, and
again observe the behaviour of the affected chimp. Now there
would be *two* unemployed chimps. Would there be any discernible
change in the relationship between the displaced chimps and those
who still had "jobs"? Would the still-employed chimps display any
signs of anxiety? Would the they display threatening facial
expressions or "barks" upon the approach of either of the unemp-
loyed chimps? We would jot down the results.

The fourth week, we could increase the "mileage required" by
a further ten percent. The fifth, we might disable yet another
exerciser, on this occasion one belonging to a dominant male. It
would be interesting to note his reactions. Would we witness a
charging display? If we did, toward what would the display be
directed? Against the inoperative exerciser? Against other
chimps? Or would he lapse into a silence? Again, we would note
the results.

The sixth week, we could increase the "mileage required" by
a further ten percent, and restrict the working hours to between
8 a.m. and 4 p.m. After 4 p.m., we would de-activate all the
exercisers until the following morning, effectively bringing to
an end any moonlighting that might have been going on. Would this
induce social tensions among the chimps? How would the female
chimps fare - particularly those with young offspring to nurse
and feed? Would there be any signs of acute psychological
stress - individuals withdrawing from the group, to sulk silently
in the more remote corners of the compound? Would there be any
"unconstructive" behaviour - perhaps chimps found pacing back and
forth along the inner limits of the compound, or perhaps banging
their heads against the compound walls? We would keep our pens
poised to record any interesting psychological phenomena.

The seventh week, we might disable yet another machine.
Perhaps we might be fortunate enough to witness the first signs
of malnutrition among some of the weaker chimps. How do chimps
react when they are hungry? What would be the attitude of the
employed chimps toward the hungry ones? Would they, on occasion,
share their chips? Would there be any noticeable change in the
mating habits of the chimps - or would this type of activity
cease altogether? Would the birth rate show signs of impending
decline? We might also be on the lookout for indications of
"chimp nostalgia" - evidenced, perhaps, by chimps with far-away
looks in their eyes, triggered by the sound of rustling leaves in
the trees outside the compound.

II

The next few weeks might be devoted entirely to observations
as the full effects of the depression were allowed to settle in.
As thoroughly humane experimenters, we might periodically stroll
through the compound, doling out chips and an occasional banana
to destitute chimps - provided, of course, that they begged for
them.

Would there be any hostility mis-directed toward the ex-
perimenters during the periodic strolls? Would there be any
tendency to destructive aggression directed against the parapher-
nalia of the experiment - against either exercisers or the
dispensers? If there were, how would we set about punishing the
"wrong-doers"?

III

After a further several weeks of observation, it might be
worthwhile to determine if we could evoke "criminal tendencies"
among the chimps. For this purpose we would obtain a large,
transparent, but completely indestructible ball of plastic.
Regardless of what violence were directed against the ball -
being bounced, jumped on, or bitten - the ball would withstand
all.

Since the decline in economic activity within the compound
would by now have resulted in a substantial number of chips
being left over, we might seal the uncirculated "capital" within
the ball. Inside the ball, the plastic chips would rattle and
tumble, perfectly visible, but as secure as government bonds in a
safety deposit box.

The completed ball would then be thrown over the wall into
the compound, and the behaviour of the chimps would be closely
scrutinized for any signs of criminal intent. What attempts, if
any, would be made to get at the ball's contents? Would such
attempts involve violence, actual or attempted? And if this did
occur, what form of punishment could we devise to correct it?
Beating the affected chimps with sticks? Putting them inside a
cage within the compound walls?

Once the ball was retrieved, we might also check for the
development of "capitalist proclivities" in the chimps' psycho-
logy. We could do this, I suppose, by throwing the same ball back
over the walls. What attempts, if any, would be made to get at
its contents? Would such attempts involve violence, actual or
attempted? And if "capitalist proclivities" did become evident,
what form of reward could we devise to reinforce them?

IV

After satisfying ourselves on these points and any others
that might occur to us during the course of the experiment, it
would be permissible to allow "good times" to return. We might,
one by one, re-activate the exercisers, repairing any damage
wrought by earlier stages of the experiment. We might reduce the
"mileage required" to normal levels. We would retrieve the
plastic ball and restore its chips to active circulation in the
"economy."

But, in restoring "prosperity," we might still be interested
in seeing whether the depression had left any lasting psycho-
logical scars on the chimps. Towards this end, we would provide
each chimp with a carpenter's apron, containing several pockets.
We would then show the chimps how to hang the aprons about their
hips, and how they might store surplus chips in their pockets.

After making sure that the chimps knew how to store the
chips in the aprons, we might further decrease the "mileage
required" - so that even normal effort would produce a surplus of
chips. Would the chimps now be inclined to "save for a rainy
day"? Would they tend to hoard and protect the chips, and to take
defensive measures against any chimps threatening to make off
with their hoard? Would their "sense of security" now be based
upon the number of plastic chips in their aprons?

V

After the chimps had regained any weight loss occasioned by
the experiment thus far, we might turn our attention to the
simulation of increased efficiency in the productive process. We
might do this by again disabling a number of machines (thereby
creating a "rainy day" for the displaced chimps) but, instead of
increasing the "mileage required" for each chip, we would DE-
CREASE it - so that fewer chimps were earning a greater number of
chips.

Meanwhile, we might alter the arrangements at the dis-
pensers. Instead of just vitamin-enriched bananas, we might
display nuts, fruits, dried monkey-meat - to provide a more
varied, interesting diet - at least for those chimps with the
money to spend. We might, however, increase the price of these
"luxury items" to TWO chips.

During the evenings, we might entertain the chimps by
showing old Charlie Chaplin movies, in which the hero carries an
umbrella and wears a bowler hat, which he doffs at every turn.
Then, in addition to the "luxury food items," we would make
bowler hats and umbrellas available to the chimps - perhaps at a
price of THREE chips.

The "affluent" chimps, those who retained their employment,
would thereby have more chips than required to sustain life and
good health. But there would be more to spend the surplus chips
on. Would the affluent chips "save" - or would they spend? Would
they willingly share their earnings with the "redundant" chimps -
the ones with no chips at all to spend? Would the affluent chimps
take to wearing bowler hats and sporting umbrellas? Would the
destitute chimps behave deferentially toward those wearing bowler
hats and umbrellas - or would there be renewed signs of social
tension among the chimps?

VI

Perhaps it might now be time to conclude the experiment. How
long would it take the chimps to discover that the gates were not
only unlocked, but slightly ajar? Would they return to their
natural environment willingly, or would they betray a "fear of
the unknown"? Would they emerge from the compound with aprons
full of chips - or would they scatter them about in playful glee?
Once outside, would they return from time to time to "buy" a
banana? Would they occasionally return, jump astride an exer-
ciser, and attempt to "earn" a chip or two? Would they roam the
forest paths on all fours like they once did, or would an oc-
casional chimp be seen adopting a three-legged gait, its remain-
ing arm clutching its apron to avoid spilling the precious
chips? Would the dominant males recapture their authority, or
would there be a permanent change in the nature of the social
hierarchy? Would there be an occasional chimp still to be seen,
swinging from branch to branch, wearing a bowler hat and carrying
an umbrella?

Fencing Out - and its Effects
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*

Would there be any point in conducting such an experiment in
real life with chimpanzees or other animals?

Not really. We have accomplished enough if we agree that
such an experiment *could* be performed. There would be little
purpose in inflicting upon the hapless chimpanzees the trials and
tribulations that we, as human beings, experience in our own
lives. Also, there is no guarantee that the chimps would *actua-
lly* behave the way we've intimated that they might under these
conditions of confinement and indirect manipulation. The under-
lying thrust of the experiment really boils down to the question,
"Would they behave the way WE do?" And to another: "What forces
have prompted US to behave the way we do?"

At first glance, it might appear that what we have done is
to fence the chimps IN. But there are really two ways of looking
at it. Have we fenced the chimps IN, or have we fenced them OUT?
If we are to extend any worthwhile parallel to the human con-
dition, we are much farther ahead to think in terms of having
fenced them OUT. In this sense, we might say that they have been
"fenced out" of their environment, their "life support system,"
and the economic basis of their individual independence.

In our own case, we have no conscious recollection of the
"fencing-out" process because it has taken place over many
generations. In some parts of the world, it is still an on-going
process. A salient example of the fencing-out process was the
Enclosure Movement, beginning about the 15th century and con-
tinuing throughout the Industrial Revolution. While it lasted,
hundreds of thousands of British peasants were thrown off the
land and out of the security of village life. Why? Initially, to
make room for sheep pastures. Wool commanded a very high price,
far more than tenant farmers could ever pay in rent. By whatever
means were possible, they were forced off the land by the lan-
downing classes of the day. Karl Polanyi in his classic work, THE
GREAT TRANSFORMATION, describes the process:

Enclosures have appropriately been called a
revolution of the rich against the poor. The lords and
nobles were upsetting the social order, breaking down
ancient law and custom, sometimes by means of violence,
often by pressure and intimidation. They were literally
robbing the poor of their share in the common, tearing
down the houses which by the hitherto unbreakable force
of custom, the poor had long regarded as theirs and their
heirs'. The fabric of society was being disrupted;
desolate villages and the ruins of human dwellings
testified to the fierceness with which the revolution
raged, endangering the defenses of the country, wasting
its towns, decimating its population, turning its over-
burdened soil into dust, harassing its people and turning
them from decent husbandmen into a mob of beggars and
thieves...

Money - in a NEW Light
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
What inward-leaning concrete walls did for the chimp,
history has done for US. The fencing-out process wreaked havoc
upon our individual and collective psychology, making most of us
thoroughly dependent upon money in order to live, and through its
instrumentality, completely subservient to forces beyond our
control. It is as if we were now confined within an Invisible
Trap.

The fencing-out process fundamentally changed the nature of
money. Now, in addition to the conventionally-defined uses of
money - as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, a means of
discharging debt, and a store-house of value - it has become a
Means of Manipulation. This has become its most important charac-
teristic.

Grasping - and changing - that reality is the key to wres-
ting control of our lives from the faceless forces that control
us, and is the essential first step in restoring a semblance of
humanity to the economy.


--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics