Jongchul Kim - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Jongchul Kim
Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Ca... more Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money and seeks ideas for an alternative economic system for a just society. This book suggests that adopting the ideas and institutions of a trust allowed personae to be combined with creditor-debtor relations and, by doing so, led to the evolution of modern money. This also helps explain why modern banking arose in England rather than continental Europe, by conceptualizing modern money as a trust and investigating the inseparable relationship between personae and modern money, because it is more than creditor-debtor relations-it takes the form of a trust. In explaining how the capitalist credit-money economy differs from previous economies, this book is a significant contribution to the literature on modern money, heterodox economics, and the philosophy of economics and finance. Jongchul Kim has critically examined the modern concepts of "person" and "property" and applied this critique to an understanding of money and finance. He is currently an associate professor
Review of Capital as Power, 2018
Elsewhere I argue that the legal concept of property was created in the image of money in the lat... more Elsewhere I argue that the legal concept of property was created in the image of money in the late Roman Republic. Since then, the division of property and contract has been an underlying structure of Western law. The paper argues that a main way of structuring financial corporate power, especially money market funds (MMFs), is a propertization of contractual claims. Propertization here means to grant property rights to shareholders who are almost reduced to functionless debenture holders and thus supposed to have only contractual claims. The paper argues that this propertization has led to the rise of financial corporate power, especially MMFs and their money‐creation mechanism. The paper also explores how the propertization of MMF shares contributed to generating the financial crisis of 2008, and it ends by briefly discussing a possible MMF reform policy.
다른백년 연구소에서 2017년에 펴냈었던 "한국보고서"의 경제부문에 실린 글입니다. 이 보고서에 제안하는 개혁정책은 다음 네 가지였습니다. (1) 기본자산제, (2) 사... more 다른백년 연구소에서 2017년에 펴냈었던 "한국보고서"의 경제부문에 실린 글입니다.
이 보고서에 제안하는 개혁정책은 다음 네 가지였습니다.
(1) 기본자산제, (2) 사회적 상속제, (3) 주주의 의결권 삭제 및 사업장 민주화.
![Research paper thumbnail of [시평] 대통령제는 비례대표제와 맞지 않아: 의원내각제 도입해야](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/56044202/thumbnails/1.jpg)
](
주주지상주의가 팽배해지면서 대기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성이 전 세계적인 문제 로 대두되어왔다. 회사의 행위에 대해 그 어떤 법적 책임도 지지 않는 대주주가 회 사에 대한 재산권... more 주주지상주의가 팽배해지면서 대기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성이 전 세계적인 문제 로 대두되어왔다. 회사의 행위에 대해 그 어떤 법적 책임도 지지 않는 대주주가 회 사에 대한 재산권을 행사해 회사를 통제함으로써, 회사의 비윤리적이고 무책임한 경영을 부추겼던 것이다. 대주주의 책임면제는 회사법상에서 보장된 것이다. 계약 권(contractual right)과 재산권(property right)이라는 모순적 권리를 둘 다 주 주가 향유할 수 있도록 회사법이 보장하기 때문에 회사의 비윤리성과 무책임성이 허용되고 강화되었다고 본 논문은 주장하고자 한다. 이렇게 주주가 재산권과 계약 권을 둘 다 향유하는 것을“재산권과 계약권의 이종교배”라고 칭할 수 있는데, 이 이종교배는 대주주들로 하여금 회사를 통제하고 자신의 특권을 행사하도록 하면서 도 그에 따른 책임은 회피할 수 있도록 한다. 이러한 점에서, 회사법의 역사는 주주 가 재산권의 행사에 따르는 책임을 회피하려는 노력의 과정이며, 무책임성을 정치 적·법적으로 정당화해주는 과정이기도 한 셈이다. 이 이종교배가 회사의 본질을 이룬다는 것이 본 논문의 주장이다. 이 주장은 회사의 본질을 정의하는 기존 논의가 재산 혹은 계약 한 쪽만을 강조하는 경향을 비판적으로 극복한 것이다. 이러한 이종 교배는 회사의 본질에 대해 정치학이 간섭할 여지를 열어 준다. 재산과 계약이라는 배타적인 개념이 섞이는 과정이야 말로, 국가와 자산가들이 정치적으로 서로 연합 하는 과정이었고, 그 정치적 과정의 산물로 회사가 탄생했기 때문이다. 따라서 회사 의 본질에 대한 완결적 정의는 정치학적 접근으로만 가능하다고 할 수 있다. 또한 본 논문의 작업은 향후 다국적 기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성을 해결할 대안을 찾는 이론적 작업의 출발점이 될 수 있을 것이다. 특히, 현재 주주가 그 책임 면에서 회 사의 외부인인 채권자에 불과하므로, 권리도 채권자의 권리 즉 이자 취득권만 가져 야 하지, 회사에 대한 지배권을 가져서는 안된다는 빌 웨더번의 대안은 심각하게 고 려해 볼만하다고 생각된다.
For the last two decades, the social irresponsibility and immorality of big business corporations has risen to an urgent international problem. This paper argues that the irresponsibility and immorality of corporations are permitted and extended, because the law endows shareholders with the two contradictory rights?property rights and contractual rights?simultaneously. This endowment of the two rights can be called the hybridity of property and contract. This hybridity allows big shareholders to control corporations but to take no responsibility for this control. Thus, the history of corporation law is the process in which shareholders have struggled to evade their responsibility for the exertion of their property rights and in which the law has justified that evasion. The paper also argues that the hybridity constitutes the essence of corporations. This argument overcomes the common wisdom on the nature of a corporation that emphasizes only one side among property and contract. The hybridity also allows us to understand the origin and nature of corporations as a political phenomenon: the two contradictory rights could have not been mixed unless property owners would make a political alliance with the state. Thus, the understanding of the nature of corporations cannot be complete without a political approach.
Korean Political Science Review, 2015
소유(property) 개념은 19세기까지만 해도 사회과학에서 자본주의의 본질, 특히 금융의 본질을 밝히는데 핵심적으로 쓰였던 개념이었다. 그러나 20세기 들어서면서 소유 개... more 소유(property) 개념은 19세기까지만 해도 사회과학에서 자본주의의 본질, 특히 금융의 본질을 밝히는데 핵심적으로 쓰였던 개념이었다. 그러나 20세기 들어서면서 소유 개념은 점차 그 중심적 입지를 잃어 갔다. 작금의 경제학자들은 유동성이라는 모호한 개념을 소유 개념 대신 사용하면서 금융의 본질을 밝히는 시도를 스스로 포기하고 있는 것으로보인다. 본 논문은 소유라는 고전적인 개념을 부활시켜 21세기 금융의 본질과 2008년국제금융위기의 원인을 설명하려고 한다. 21세기 금융의 본질을 정치학적 개념인 소유로 설명할 수 있다는 사실은 현대금융을 정치적 현상으로 이해할 수 있다는 것을 의미한다. 머니마켓펀드와 환매조건부채권은 21세기 현대금융의 대표적인 금융기법이면서도 2008년 국제금융위기를 초래한 주요 원인이었다. 본 논문은 이 두 금융기법의 본질이 소유권과 계약권을 융합한데 있다고 주장한다. 소유권과 계약권을 교묘히 섞어서 둘 다의 이점을 취하여, 책임은 최소화하고 권한은 확대하는 것이다. 그리고 이 융합을 통해 머니마켓펀드와 환매조건부채권에 투자한 채권자들은 일반 채권자들이 누릴 수 없는 특권적 권리인 소유권을 누리게 되고 이 권리의 행사는 결국 2008년 국제금융위기를 초래하게 된다.
Journal of Economic Issues, Dec 1, 2014
This paper argues that the development of money and the legal concept of property has been intert... more This paper argues that the development of money and the legal concept of property has been intertwined. That is, money and rights in rem have tended to mirror each other historically. The fictional concept of rights in rem was arguably created in the image of money in the late Roman Republic, where the concept of dominium or rights in rem was first settled at law and money became a predominant medium for social relations. The paper demonstrates that contemporary banking, including commercial and shadow banking, creates money by mirroring credit in the image of rights in rem.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 00076791 2011 578132, Oct 1, 2011
ABSTRACT London goldsmith-bankers' development of paper credit-money in the seventeenth c... more ABSTRACT London goldsmith-bankers' development of paper credit-money in the seventeenth century ushered in the era of modern banking. This essay argues that this innovation of paper credit-money by goldsmith-bankers was the institutionalisation of the double-ownership scheme known as trust. This trust scheme was at the centre of the custom or morality that underlay the political struggle between the Crown, landowners, and the bourgeoisie in early modern England, the struggle from which goldsmith-banking and, later, joint-stock banking developed. This double ownership remains a central feature of the present banking system. Also during the financial boom of the late twentieth century, which ended in the present world financial crisis, the trust scheme was used extensively by many financial firms, such as mutual funds, pension funds, and asset-securitisation trusts.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
The recent sovereign debt crisis raises a debate on whether the cancelation of sovereign debt is ... more The recent sovereign debt crisis raises a debate on whether the cancelation of sovereign debt is compatible with democracy. Scholars opposed to the cancelation of sovereign debt refer to the Glorious Revolution of 1688, in which the British government began to make the people as a whole liable for the obligations incurred by their government. These scholars argue that this commitment formed the basis of the development of the financial system. This paper criticizes this argument by identifying the intrinsic contradictions of representative democracy, public debt, and modern banking in early modern England, contradictions that were incompatible with the well-being and democracy of a community. It further examines how the contradictions of representative democracy and public debt contributed to the evolution of modern banking at the time.
Journal of Economic Issues, 2013
The trust is, by definition, a hybrid between rights in rem and rights in personam and is an Engl... more The trust is, by definition, a hybrid between rights in rem and rights in personam and is an English legal concept that distinguishes the English common law from the Roman law tradition of Continental Europe. The trust is largely absent in the classical writings of Karl Marx and Max Weber on the origins and nature of capitalism. This essay demonstrates that the trust is central to an adequate understanding of capitalism-including the capitalist institutions of modern banking, modern corporations, and representative democracy-and demonstrates that modern banking and modern politics are mirror images of each other. Credit economies before capitalism created institutions to protect debtors, or often revived the social order by cancelling debts. The capitalist credit economy, in contrast, considers strict debt obligations a supreme moral good and a way of securing social order. It creates a political scheme to ensure that debt obligations are strictly fulfilled. This essay argues that this scheme is a trust. The trust turns the debts of individuals, whose death can cancel their debt obligations, into the debts of imaginary groups, such as the modern state, whose identities and obligations are permanently maintained by replaceable trustees. The essay further argues that without this politics of the trust, modern banking could not have developed.
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2014
ABSTRACT Postmodern thinker A. N. Whitehead argued that the idea of the identity of the self is o... more ABSTRACT Postmodern thinker A. N. Whitehead argued that the idea of the identity of the self is one of the significant mistakes made by modern philosophy. From this postmodern perspective, this essay examines how this mistaken concept underlies the modern ownership schemes of property, trusts and finance. It argues that exploiting the hybridity of money and credit explains the development of modern ownership from property to trusts and modern finance, and that, in the process of exploiting this hybridity, property owners struggle to endure and secure their identities permanently. This essay also analyses unethical aspects of the hybridity of modern finance, as well as its systemic vulnerability, which contributed to the financial crisis of 2008. The essay concludes with a brief discussion of a general reform principle for the financial sector.
Books by Jongchul Kim
Routledge, 2023
In a given era, social scientists often share a common philosophical perspective, whether overtly... more In a given era, social scientists often share a common philosophical perspective, whether overtly or implicitly, despite studying different subjects. However, what if the prevailing perspective among conventional economists proves problematic, preventing them from providing a comprehensive understanding of the capitalist financial system? In modern Western philosophy, conventional economics is built upon two central concepts: person and property. Surprisingly, there is no academic exploration of how these concepts form the essence of modern money. This absence of theoretical inquiry limits our comprehensive understanding of the true nature of modern money. For instance, the credit theory of money, gaining popularity among heterodox scholars, argues that money is credit, representing creditor-debtor relations. Unfortunately, this theory overlooks the distinct nature of capitalist creditor-debtor relations, which differ from their pre-modern form. While creditor-debtor relations have existed for millennia, their prevalence in modern times is unprecedented. What factors have contributed to their widespread occurrence? How do they differ from pre-capitalist forms? This book asserts that modern money goes beyond mere creditor-debtor relations, It argues that modern money emerges as a combination of creditordebtor relations with three personae-the modern state, business corporations, and individualism-and a combination of creditor-debtor relations with property. These combinations are referred to as a trust. Legal textbooks provide two definitions of a trust. The first definition states that a trust is a double-ownership that makes it possible for
Routledge, 2023
Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money... more Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money and seeks ideas for an alternative economic system for a just society. This book suggests that adopting the ideas and institutions of a trust allowed personae to be combined with creditor-debtor relations and, by doing so, led to the evolution of modern money. This also helps explain why modern banking arose in England rather than continental Europe, by conceptualizing modern money as a trust and investigating the inseparable relationship between personae and modern money, because it is more than creditor-debtor relations-it takes the form of a trust. In explaining how the capitalist credit-money economy differs from previous economies, this book is a significant contribution to the literature on modern money, heterodox economics, and the philosophy of economics and finance.
개마고원, 2019
우리 일상에서는 너무 당연하게 여겨지는 주식회사 제도, 화폐 제도, 은행업이 사실은 모순과 불합리 위에서 굴러가고 있는 거라면? 그런 본질적 모순이 오늘날 자본주의 경제체제의... more 우리 일상에서는 너무 당연하게 여겨지는 주식회사 제도, 화폐 제도, 은행업이 사실은 모순과 불합리 위에서 굴러가고 있는 거라면? 그런 본질적 모순이 오늘날 자본주의 경제체제의 근본적 결함을 보여주는 것이라면? 이 책은 현대 경제 시스템의 기원(基源)에 대한 탐구로부터 시작하여 지금 우리가 당연시하는 것들을 전혀 새로운 눈으로 보게끔 한다. 반복되는 국제금융위기 이후 신자유주의 체제에 대한 회의와 그 대안에 대한 요구가 생긴 지도 오래지만, 현실은 그저 몇 가지 부분적 수정과 땜질식 처방에 그칠 뿐 근본문제를 붙들고 새로운 시스템을 고민하는 큰 그림은 좀처럼 찾아보기 힘들다. 정치학이든 경제학이든 사회학이든 미시적 현상 분석이나 기술적이고 부분적인 연구에만 치우쳐 있다. 저자는 이 책에서 철학·역사·정치학을 아우르는 학제적 접근법을 통해 ‘큰 체제적 질문’에 도전하고 있다. 근시안적인 계량주의와 실증주의에서 벗어나 우리가 사는 사회를 근본적으로 다시 사유해보고자 하는 것이다. 그 핵심은 주식회사, 금융제도, 대의제라는 세 범주를 ‘재산권과 계약권의 이종교배’라는 개념으로 관통해내는 데 있다.
Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Ca... more Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money and seeks ideas for an alternative economic system for a just society. This book suggests that adopting the ideas and institutions of a trust allowed personae to be combined with creditor-debtor relations and, by doing so, led to the evolution of modern money. This also helps explain why modern banking arose in England rather than continental Europe, by conceptualizing modern money as a trust and investigating the inseparable relationship between personae and modern money, because it is more than creditor-debtor relations-it takes the form of a trust. In explaining how the capitalist credit-money economy differs from previous economies, this book is a significant contribution to the literature on modern money, heterodox economics, and the philosophy of economics and finance. Jongchul Kim has critically examined the modern concepts of "person" and "property" and applied this critique to an understanding of money and finance. He is currently an associate professor
Review of Capital as Power, 2018
Elsewhere I argue that the legal concept of property was created in the image of money in the lat... more Elsewhere I argue that the legal concept of property was created in the image of money in the late Roman Republic. Since then, the division of property and contract has been an underlying structure of Western law. The paper argues that a main way of structuring financial corporate power, especially money market funds (MMFs), is a propertization of contractual claims. Propertization here means to grant property rights to shareholders who are almost reduced to functionless debenture holders and thus supposed to have only contractual claims. The paper argues that this propertization has led to the rise of financial corporate power, especially MMFs and their money‐creation mechanism. The paper also explores how the propertization of MMF shares contributed to generating the financial crisis of 2008, and it ends by briefly discussing a possible MMF reform policy.
다른백년 연구소에서 2017년에 펴냈었던 "한국보고서"의 경제부문에 실린 글입니다. 이 보고서에 제안하는 개혁정책은 다음 네 가지였습니다. (1) 기본자산제, (2) 사... more 다른백년 연구소에서 2017년에 펴냈었던 "한국보고서"의 경제부문에 실린 글입니다.
이 보고서에 제안하는 개혁정책은 다음 네 가지였습니다.
(1) 기본자산제, (2) 사회적 상속제, (3) 주주의 의결권 삭제 및 사업장 민주화.
주주지상주의가 팽배해지면서 대기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성이 전 세계적인 문제 로 대두되어왔다. 회사의 행위에 대해 그 어떤 법적 책임도 지지 않는 대주주가 회 사에 대한 재산권... more 주주지상주의가 팽배해지면서 대기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성이 전 세계적인 문제 로 대두되어왔다. 회사의 행위에 대해 그 어떤 법적 책임도 지지 않는 대주주가 회 사에 대한 재산권을 행사해 회사를 통제함으로써, 회사의 비윤리적이고 무책임한 경영을 부추겼던 것이다. 대주주의 책임면제는 회사법상에서 보장된 것이다. 계약 권(contractual right)과 재산권(property right)이라는 모순적 권리를 둘 다 주 주가 향유할 수 있도록 회사법이 보장하기 때문에 회사의 비윤리성과 무책임성이 허용되고 강화되었다고 본 논문은 주장하고자 한다. 이렇게 주주가 재산권과 계약 권을 둘 다 향유하는 것을“재산권과 계약권의 이종교배”라고 칭할 수 있는데, 이 이종교배는 대주주들로 하여금 회사를 통제하고 자신의 특권을 행사하도록 하면서 도 그에 따른 책임은 회피할 수 있도록 한다. 이러한 점에서, 회사법의 역사는 주주 가 재산권의 행사에 따르는 책임을 회피하려는 노력의 과정이며, 무책임성을 정치 적·법적으로 정당화해주는 과정이기도 한 셈이다. 이 이종교배가 회사의 본질을 이룬다는 것이 본 논문의 주장이다. 이 주장은 회사의 본질을 정의하는 기존 논의가 재산 혹은 계약 한 쪽만을 강조하는 경향을 비판적으로 극복한 것이다. 이러한 이종 교배는 회사의 본질에 대해 정치학이 간섭할 여지를 열어 준다. 재산과 계약이라는 배타적인 개념이 섞이는 과정이야 말로, 국가와 자산가들이 정치적으로 서로 연합 하는 과정이었고, 그 정치적 과정의 산물로 회사가 탄생했기 때문이다. 따라서 회사 의 본질에 대한 완결적 정의는 정치학적 접근으로만 가능하다고 할 수 있다. 또한 본 논문의 작업은 향후 다국적 기업의 무책임성과 비윤리성을 해결할 대안을 찾는 이론적 작업의 출발점이 될 수 있을 것이다. 특히, 현재 주주가 그 책임 면에서 회 사의 외부인인 채권자에 불과하므로, 권리도 채권자의 권리 즉 이자 취득권만 가져 야 하지, 회사에 대한 지배권을 가져서는 안된다는 빌 웨더번의 대안은 심각하게 고 려해 볼만하다고 생각된다.
For the last two decades, the social irresponsibility and immorality of big business corporations has risen to an urgent international problem. This paper argues that the irresponsibility and immorality of corporations are permitted and extended, because the law endows shareholders with the two contradictory rights?property rights and contractual rights?simultaneously. This endowment of the two rights can be called the hybridity of property and contract. This hybridity allows big shareholders to control corporations but to take no responsibility for this control. Thus, the history of corporation law is the process in which shareholders have struggled to evade their responsibility for the exertion of their property rights and in which the law has justified that evasion. The paper also argues that the hybridity constitutes the essence of corporations. This argument overcomes the common wisdom on the nature of a corporation that emphasizes only one side among property and contract. The hybridity also allows us to understand the origin and nature of corporations as a political phenomenon: the two contradictory rights could have not been mixed unless property owners would make a political alliance with the state. Thus, the understanding of the nature of corporations cannot be complete without a political approach.
Korean Political Science Review, 2015
소유(property) 개념은 19세기까지만 해도 사회과학에서 자본주의의 본질, 특히 금융의 본질을 밝히는데 핵심적으로 쓰였던 개념이었다. 그러나 20세기 들어서면서 소유 개... more 소유(property) 개념은 19세기까지만 해도 사회과학에서 자본주의의 본질, 특히 금융의 본질을 밝히는데 핵심적으로 쓰였던 개념이었다. 그러나 20세기 들어서면서 소유 개념은 점차 그 중심적 입지를 잃어 갔다. 작금의 경제학자들은 유동성이라는 모호한 개념을 소유 개념 대신 사용하면서 금융의 본질을 밝히는 시도를 스스로 포기하고 있는 것으로보인다. 본 논문은 소유라는 고전적인 개념을 부활시켜 21세기 금융의 본질과 2008년국제금융위기의 원인을 설명하려고 한다. 21세기 금융의 본질을 정치학적 개념인 소유로 설명할 수 있다는 사실은 현대금융을 정치적 현상으로 이해할 수 있다는 것을 의미한다. 머니마켓펀드와 환매조건부채권은 21세기 현대금융의 대표적인 금융기법이면서도 2008년 국제금융위기를 초래한 주요 원인이었다. 본 논문은 이 두 금융기법의 본질이 소유권과 계약권을 융합한데 있다고 주장한다. 소유권과 계약권을 교묘히 섞어서 둘 다의 이점을 취하여, 책임은 최소화하고 권한은 확대하는 것이다. 그리고 이 융합을 통해 머니마켓펀드와 환매조건부채권에 투자한 채권자들은 일반 채권자들이 누릴 수 없는 특권적 권리인 소유권을 누리게 되고 이 권리의 행사는 결국 2008년 국제금융위기를 초래하게 된다.
Journal of Economic Issues, Dec 1, 2014
This paper argues that the development of money and the legal concept of property has been intert... more This paper argues that the development of money and the legal concept of property has been intertwined. That is, money and rights in rem have tended to mirror each other historically. The fictional concept of rights in rem was arguably created in the image of money in the late Roman Republic, where the concept of dominium or rights in rem was first settled at law and money became a predominant medium for social relations. The paper demonstrates that contemporary banking, including commercial and shadow banking, creates money by mirroring credit in the image of rights in rem.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 00076791 2011 578132, Oct 1, 2011
ABSTRACT London goldsmith-bankers' development of paper credit-money in the seventeenth c... more ABSTRACT London goldsmith-bankers' development of paper credit-money in the seventeenth century ushered in the era of modern banking. This essay argues that this innovation of paper credit-money by goldsmith-bankers was the institutionalisation of the double-ownership scheme known as trust. This trust scheme was at the centre of the custom or morality that underlay the political struggle between the Crown, landowners, and the bourgeoisie in early modern England, the struggle from which goldsmith-banking and, later, joint-stock banking developed. This double ownership remains a central feature of the present banking system. Also during the financial boom of the late twentieth century, which ended in the present world financial crisis, the trust scheme was used extensively by many financial firms, such as mutual funds, pension funds, and asset-securitisation trusts.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
The recent sovereign debt crisis raises a debate on whether the cancelation of sovereign debt is ... more The recent sovereign debt crisis raises a debate on whether the cancelation of sovereign debt is compatible with democracy. Scholars opposed to the cancelation of sovereign debt refer to the Glorious Revolution of 1688, in which the British government began to make the people as a whole liable for the obligations incurred by their government. These scholars argue that this commitment formed the basis of the development of the financial system. This paper criticizes this argument by identifying the intrinsic contradictions of representative democracy, public debt, and modern banking in early modern England, contradictions that were incompatible with the well-being and democracy of a community. It further examines how the contradictions of representative democracy and public debt contributed to the evolution of modern banking at the time.
Journal of Economic Issues, 2013
The trust is, by definition, a hybrid between rights in rem and rights in personam and is an Engl... more The trust is, by definition, a hybrid between rights in rem and rights in personam and is an English legal concept that distinguishes the English common law from the Roman law tradition of Continental Europe. The trust is largely absent in the classical writings of Karl Marx and Max Weber on the origins and nature of capitalism. This essay demonstrates that the trust is central to an adequate understanding of capitalism-including the capitalist institutions of modern banking, modern corporations, and representative democracy-and demonstrates that modern banking and modern politics are mirror images of each other. Credit economies before capitalism created institutions to protect debtors, or often revived the social order by cancelling debts. The capitalist credit economy, in contrast, considers strict debt obligations a supreme moral good and a way of securing social order. It creates a political scheme to ensure that debt obligations are strictly fulfilled. This essay argues that this scheme is a trust. The trust turns the debts of individuals, whose death can cancel their debt obligations, into the debts of imaginary groups, such as the modern state, whose identities and obligations are permanently maintained by replaceable trustees. The essay further argues that without this politics of the trust, modern banking could not have developed.
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2014
ABSTRACT Postmodern thinker A. N. Whitehead argued that the idea of the identity of the self is o... more ABSTRACT Postmodern thinker A. N. Whitehead argued that the idea of the identity of the self is one of the significant mistakes made by modern philosophy. From this postmodern perspective, this essay examines how this mistaken concept underlies the modern ownership schemes of property, trusts and finance. It argues that exploiting the hybridity of money and credit explains the development of modern ownership from property to trusts and modern finance, and that, in the process of exploiting this hybridity, property owners struggle to endure and secure their identities permanently. This essay also analyses unethical aspects of the hybridity of modern finance, as well as its systemic vulnerability, which contributed to the financial crisis of 2008. The essay concludes with a brief discussion of a general reform principle for the financial sector.
Routledge, 2023
In a given era, social scientists often share a common philosophical perspective, whether overtly... more In a given era, social scientists often share a common philosophical perspective, whether overtly or implicitly, despite studying different subjects. However, what if the prevailing perspective among conventional economists proves problematic, preventing them from providing a comprehensive understanding of the capitalist financial system? In modern Western philosophy, conventional economics is built upon two central concepts: person and property. Surprisingly, there is no academic exploration of how these concepts form the essence of modern money. This absence of theoretical inquiry limits our comprehensive understanding of the true nature of modern money. For instance, the credit theory of money, gaining popularity among heterodox scholars, argues that money is credit, representing creditor-debtor relations. Unfortunately, this theory overlooks the distinct nature of capitalist creditor-debtor relations, which differ from their pre-modern form. While creditor-debtor relations have existed for millennia, their prevalence in modern times is unprecedented. What factors have contributed to their widespread occurrence? How do they differ from pre-capitalist forms? This book asserts that modern money goes beyond mere creditor-debtor relations, It argues that modern money emerges as a combination of creditordebtor relations with three personae-the modern state, business corporations, and individualism-and a combination of creditor-debtor relations with property. These combinations are referred to as a trust. Legal textbooks provide two definitions of a trust. The first definition states that a trust is a double-ownership that makes it possible for
Routledge, 2023
Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money... more Modern Money and the Rise and Fall of Capitalist Finance examines the true nature of modern money and seeks ideas for an alternative economic system for a just society. This book suggests that adopting the ideas and institutions of a trust allowed personae to be combined with creditor-debtor relations and, by doing so, led to the evolution of modern money. This also helps explain why modern banking arose in England rather than continental Europe, by conceptualizing modern money as a trust and investigating the inseparable relationship between personae and modern money, because it is more than creditor-debtor relations-it takes the form of a trust. In explaining how the capitalist credit-money economy differs from previous economies, this book is a significant contribution to the literature on modern money, heterodox economics, and the philosophy of economics and finance.
개마고원, 2019
우리 일상에서는 너무 당연하게 여겨지는 주식회사 제도, 화폐 제도, 은행업이 사실은 모순과 불합리 위에서 굴러가고 있는 거라면? 그런 본질적 모순이 오늘날 자본주의 경제체제의... more 우리 일상에서는 너무 당연하게 여겨지는 주식회사 제도, 화폐 제도, 은행업이 사실은 모순과 불합리 위에서 굴러가고 있는 거라면? 그런 본질적 모순이 오늘날 자본주의 경제체제의 근본적 결함을 보여주는 것이라면? 이 책은 현대 경제 시스템의 기원(基源)에 대한 탐구로부터 시작하여 지금 우리가 당연시하는 것들을 전혀 새로운 눈으로 보게끔 한다. 반복되는 국제금융위기 이후 신자유주의 체제에 대한 회의와 그 대안에 대한 요구가 생긴 지도 오래지만, 현실은 그저 몇 가지 부분적 수정과 땜질식 처방에 그칠 뿐 근본문제를 붙들고 새로운 시스템을 고민하는 큰 그림은 좀처럼 찾아보기 힘들다. 정치학이든 경제학이든 사회학이든 미시적 현상 분석이나 기술적이고 부분적인 연구에만 치우쳐 있다. 저자는 이 책에서 철학·역사·정치학을 아우르는 학제적 접근법을 통해 ‘큰 체제적 질문’에 도전하고 있다. 근시안적인 계량주의와 실증주의에서 벗어나 우리가 사는 사회를 근본적으로 다시 사유해보고자 하는 것이다. 그 핵심은 주식회사, 금융제도, 대의제라는 세 범주를 ‘재산권과 계약권의 이종교배’라는 개념으로 관통해내는 데 있다.