Upon the recommendation of several
people, I recently acquired David Graeber's new book Debt: The First 5,000 Years. With a title like that, I assumed that it'd be a
conventional and somewhat tedious work of economic history. However,
since debt is ultimately at the root of the whole credit union
project, I figured that getting a long historical view of the
phenomenon would be worth the slog. As such, I brewed up a cup of
tea, hefted the substantial tome, and began to read.
Within the first twenty pages, my
expectations of a dry economic history narrative were completely
blown out of the water. Graeber, it turns out, is an anthropologist,
not an economist, and that perspective is powerfully evident
throughout the text. Instead of accepting the commonly held
assumptions of economists and lay people on the origins of money and
debt, he uses his encyclopedic knowledge of human cultures to refute
many of those premises with hard, specific evidence, and offers an
interesting new lens through which to view the development and role
of debt in both the historical development and the lived reality of
human societies. Indeed, Graeber's insightful argument covers so much
terrain that it would be virtually impossible to do it full justice
in a short book review. As such, I'll limit my observations to a few
key points and their implications for credit unionism.
The first part of the book is
primarily concerned with butchering some of the economics
profession's sacred cows. After pointing out that most Econ 1
students are currently taught that money evolved out of barter
relationships, Graeber shows that this perspective has been rooted in
thought experiments since the time of Adam Smith. However, when the
actual historical and anthropological record is consulted, it is
glaringly obvious that it actually happened the other way around:
credit relationships came first and were later supplemented and
sometimes replaced by coinage only as a result of the utility that
the State derived from the markets thus created (i.e., they were
convenient ways to provision troops, bureaucrats, etc.).
From this starting point, Graeber
takes the reader on a whirlwind tour through a variety of topics
which, on the surface, seem to have little to do with debt proper,
such as slavery, honor, and the main moral principles which he argues
underpin all economic relations in various combinations: communism
(in a micro-social rather than political sense), exchange, and
hierarchy. Masterfully synthesizing these disparate ideas, Graeber
advances a very interesting argument about the origins of our
contemporary conceptions of debt.
Initially, he notes, most human
societies recognize that their constituent individuals cannot be
truly bought or sold, and, as such, things such as dowries and bride
wealth were paid in a special kind of currency (which he refers to as
"social currency") which was generally not negotiable for
commodities such as food, simple crafts, etc. Instead, such social
currency had the function of rearranging the social relationships of
people in the community, but, no matter the form of that
rearrangement, each party had responsibilities towards the other.
This begins to shift in societies with
the introduction of chattel slavery. In a traditional hierarchical
society, even being at the bottom of the totem pole still meant that
you existed in a web of mutual obligations with others in the
community. However, an individual who has been entirely torn from
their social context and purchased by an individual in a community in
which they have no connections is an entirely different story. That
slave can be treated in almost any manner without social
repercussions, and can thus be used (and thought of) in an entirely
instrumental way. This, according to Graeber, leads to a whole
cascade of consequences that fundamentally changes the way people
view the world in general: if humans are negotiable and alienable, so
is everything else. The brutal effects of this transformation are
illustrated with vivid historical examples from societies as
disparate as West Africa and Thailand, and provides the foundation
for a fascinating perspective that sees the social, religious,
philosophical, and economic characteristics of a variety of
historical periods as being heavily influenced by each era's
conceptions about the nature of money and debt.
While the intricacies of Graeber's
world-historical argument are fascinating and add enormous value to
the book, its most interesting element, from a credit unionist
perspective, is his discussion of the fundamental nature of debt. As
he makes very clear, debt is such an essential element of our culture
that we rarely stop to really consider its particulars. As such, he
sets out to do just that, stating that, at its core, "Debt is a
very specific thing ... It first requires a relationship between two
people who do not consider each other fundamentally different sorts
of being, who are at least potential equals, who are
equals in those ways that are really important, and who are currently
not in a state of equality--but for whom there is some way to set
matters straight." (120)
A
debt between two individuals thus creates a temporary hierarchical
relationship between them, and in societies in which the alienation
of relationships pioneered by slavery has been internalized, such
debts can then be transfered to, or even originated by, a creditor
with no interest at all in the wellbeing of the debtor as long as the
debt continues to be serviced. As a result, debts in such societies
can make the status of debtor virtually a form of slavery as they are
pushed to do things that would have been unthinkable had the need to
pay off their debts not been hanging over their heads.
A
fascinating example of debt-obligations leading to incredible
brutality can be historically located in the example of the conquest
of Mexico. The leader of the small Spanish expeditionary force,
Cortes, was deeply in debt, and saw the expedition as his chance to
finally extricate himself from that situation. The incredible
brutality of that campaign and of the genocidal working conditions
later implemented by his lieutenants in the mines they administered
has been traditionally been chalked up to the barbaric greed of
thuggish conquistadors. However, Graeber argues that, as debtors,
those men actually did not feel that they had much choice in the
matter of how they behaved. In order to fend off their creditors,
they had to extract as much wealth as quickly as they could in order
to avoid being shipped off to Spain in chains, and their creditors,
being distant and disconnected, cared little about what they were
doing as long as the interest payments kept rolling in.
In
light of this understanding of debt, the credit union project takes
on new meaning. In contrast to the alienated quasi-slavery that
resulted from being deeply indebted to a usurious loan shark, the
credit union offered a different way of being. Instead of debt
creating an hierarchical power relationship between the debtor and
the lender, receiving a loan from an institution in which the debtor
had an ownership stake allowed, in many cases, for being in debt to
not have the effect of breaking the debtor's equal standing with the
other members of his or her community. In addition, the "esprit
de corps" that Roy Bergengren saw as a characteristic of many
small credit unions functioned to limit the disconnect between the
debt and the personal situation of the debtor. Old minutes of credit
committee meetings are replete with instances of a loan being
adjusted, or even written off, due to circumstances of legitimate
hardship. As such, an appreciation of Graeber's perspective on the
intersection of debt and power serves to provide a deeper
understanding of the nature of the liberation that credit unions
offered many people of modest means in the 20th century. The credit
union was not simply a way to get better returns on one's savings or
cheaper credit; it also offered a way for people who had been deeply socially
degraded by debt to recover their dignity.
Though
not specifically about credit unions, Graeber's work is nonetheless
an incredibly valuable resource for both those interested in credit
union history and those who work in the movement's contemporary
institutions. He covers a truly enormous amount of ground, from
anthropology to economics to philosophy to religion, and upon
completing the book, one's understanding of debt, money, and history
will be profoundly enriched. Do yourself a favor and get your hands
on Debt: The First 5,000 Years!
Thanks for this review. I've been meaning to get a copy of it for myself. I'll probably run down to the local radical booksellers and get one.
ReplyDeleteGood review. I've been meaning to get a copy too and will mean a little harder now.
ReplyDeleteI saw Graeber speak on this topic just over a year ago, in Oxford, and he is a truly inspirational speaker - fizzing with ideas. It's so refreshing to see someone looking at the big picture instead of being locked into an early 21st-century Western worldview.