Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T18:49:53.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Significance of Money Beyond Ingham’s Sociology of Money

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2015

Stefano Sgambati
Stefano Sgambati*
Affiliation:
University of Naples Federico II, Naples [[email protected]]
Get access

Abstract

Understanding money requires that we first grasp what makes money so significant—so valuable—to us. The article thus examines the sociology outlined by Geoffrey Ingham and criticises its ontology of money as a measure of value underpinned by state authority. By contrast, it argues that money ought to be primarily intended as value in itself. Accordingly, money’s most specific attribute is none of its canonical functions but rather purchasing power: the power not to pay, or else the power to buy time. The latter is not the mere product of state (fiscal) agency, but is entangled from the start with the production of liquidity and the construction of speculative markets for debt. Thus the paper emphasises the importance of concrete bank discounting vis-à-vis abstract accounting in concrete processes of monetisation, and shows how modern money, far from cancelling debts, is historically constructed within liquid financial relations so as to “buy time” and systematically procrastinate the final “rendering of accounts” for debtors. As a result, money cannot exist without the simultaneous existence of a debt that it will never discharge.

Résumé

Comprendre l’argent suppose tout d’abord de saisir ce qui rend l’argent si significatif – si précieux – à nos yeux. Cet article étudie la sociologie de l’argent élaborée par Geoffrey Ingham et propose une critique de sa conception ontologique de l’argent comme mesure de valeur soutenue par l’autorité de l’État. Par contraste, il affirme que l’argent devrait être principalement conçu comme une valeur en soi. L’attribut le plus spécifique de l’argent ne correspond à aucune de ses fonctions canoniques, mais s’identifie à un pouvoir d’achat : le pouvoir de ne pas payer, ou encore le pouvoir d’acheter du temps. Ce dernier ne dépend pas de l’État fiscal mais il est, dès le départ, indissociable de la production de liquidité et de la construction de marchés spéculatifs de la dette. L’article montre l’importance d’étudier les pratiques concrètes d’actualisation bancaire mais également de quelle manière l’argent, loin de supprimer les dettes, est construit historiquement à l’intérieur de relations financières liquides en vue d’« acheter du temps » et systématiquement retarder le « rendu des comptes » final pour les débiteurs. En conséquence, l’argent ne peut exister sans l'existence simultanée d'une dette qu’il n’annule jamais.

Zusammenfassung

Geld zu verstehen, bedeutet zuallererst zu begreifen, weshalb Geld für uns so bedeutsam, so wichtig, ist. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet die von Geoffrey Ingham entworfene Soziologie des Geldes und kritisiert die Geldontologie als ein staatlich kontrolliertes Wertmaß. Demgegenüber wird behauptet, dass Geld hauptsächlich als ein eigenständiger Wert konzipiert sein sollte. Das spezifischste Attribut des Geldes entspricht keiner seiner kanonischen Aufgaben, sondern dem Erwerb: die Fähigkeit nicht zu zahlen oder Zeit zu kaufen. Letztere ist nicht nur unabhängig von Finanzbehörden, sondern von Anfang an gebunden an die Liquiditätsbeschaffung und Entstehung spekulativer Schuldenmärkte. Der Aufsatz unterstreicht die Bedeutung, sowohl die konkreten Praktiken der Bankenaktualisierung zu untersuchen als auch auf welche Art und Weise Geld, anstatt Schulden zu tilgen, historisch innerhalb der liquiden Finanzbeziehungen auf den „Zeitkauf“ ausgerichtet ist und systematisch den Kontenabschluss der Debitoren verzögert. Folglich kann Geld nicht ohne die zeitgleiche Existenz einer Schuld bestehen, die es nie auflöst.

Keywords

InghamOntology of moneyMethodological relationalismPurchasing powerDiscountingLiquidityFinanceInghamOntologie de l’argentRelationalisme méthodologiquePouvoir d’achatActualisationSolvabilitéFinancesInghamGeldontologieMethodologischer RelationalismusKaufkraftDiskontierungSolvenzFinanzen
Type
Research Article
Information
European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , August 2015 , pp. 307 - 339
Copyright
Copyright © A.E.S. 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Admati, Anat and Hellwig, Martin, 2013. The Bankers’ New Clothes. What’s Wrong with Banking and What to Do about it (Princeton and Oxford, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Allon, Fiona, 2015. “Everyday Leverage, or Leveraging the Everyday”, Cultural Studies DOI: 10.1080/09502386.2015.1017140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amato, Massimo, 2010. “Silence Is Gold: Some Preliminary Notes on Money, Speech, Calculation”, in Massimo A., Doria L. and L. Fantacci, eds., Money and Calculation. Economic and sociological perspectives (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amato, Massimoet al., eds. 2010. L’enigma della moneta (e l’inizio dell’economia)Google Scholar
Amato, Massimo, Luigi, Doria and Fantacci, Luca, eds., 2010. Money and Calculation. Economic and Sociological Perspectives (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amato, Massimo and Fantacci, Luca, 2012. The End of Finance (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Anderson, Benjamin M., 1917. The Value of Money (New York, The Macmillan Company).Google Scholar
Aristotle, (transl. by C.D.C Reeve) 1998. Politics (Cambridge, Hackett Publishing Company).Google Scholar
Bell, Stephanie, 2001. “The Role of the State and the Hierarchy of Money”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 25: 149-163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjerg, Ole, 2014. Making Money. The Philosophy of Crisis Capitalism (London/New York, Verso).Google Scholar
Bloch, Marc, 1981 [1954]. Lineamenti di una storia monetaria d’Europa (Torino, Einaudi).Google Scholar
Christophers, Brett, 2011. “Making Finance Productive”, Economy and Society, 40 (1): 112-140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commons, John R., 1924. Legal Foundations of Capitalism (New York, The Macmillan Company).Google Scholar
Commons, John R., 1931. “Institutional Economics”, American Economic Review, 21 (4): 648-657.Google Scholar
Dodd, Nigel, 1994. The Sociology of Money. Economics, Reason and Contemporary Society (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Dodd, Nigel, 2005a. “Reinventing Monies in Europe”, Economy and Society, 34 (4): 558-583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, Nigel, 2005b. “Laundering Money: on the Need for Conceptual Clarity within the Sociology of Money”, European Journal of Sociology, 46 (3): 387-411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Febrero, Eladio, 2009. “Three difficulties with Neo-Chartalism”, Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics, 31 (3): 523-541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fourcade, Marion, 2011. “Cents and Sensibility: Economic Valuation and the Nature of ‘Nature’”, American Journal of Sociology, 116 (6): 1721-1777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, Herbert S., 1977. Two Philosophies of Money. The Conflict of Trust and Authority (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
Graeber, David, 2011. Debt. The First 5,000 Years (New York, Melville House Publishing).Google Scholar
Gnos, Claude and Rochon, Louis-Philippe, 2002. “Money Creation and the State: A Critical Assessment of Chartalism”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 32 (3): 41-57.Google Scholar
Heinsohn, Gunnar and Steiger, Otto, 2000. “The Property Theory of Interest and Money”, in Smithin, J., ed., What Is Money? (London/New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Heinsohn, Gunnar and Steiger, Otto, 2006. “Interest and Money: The Property Explanation”, in Arestis, P. and M. Sawyer, eds., A Handbook of Alternative Monetary Economics (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 2001. How Economics Forgot History. The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science (London/ New York, Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Michael, 2012. The Bubble and Beyond. Fictitious Capital, Debt Deflation and the Global Crisis (Dresden, islet-Verlag).Google Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 1996. “Money Is a Social Relation”, Review of Social Economy, 54 (4): 507-529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2000. “Babylonian Madness: On the Historical and Sociological Origins of Money”, in Smithin, J., ed., What is Money? (London/New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2004. The Nature of Money (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2006. “Further Reflections on the Ontology of Money: Responses to Lapavitsas and Dodd”, Economy and Society, 35 (2): 259-278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2007. “The Specificity of Money”, European Journal of Sociology, 48 (2): 265-272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2008. Capitalism (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Ingham, Geoffrey, 2013. “O Sacred Hunger of Pernicious Gold! What Bands of Faith Can Impious Lucre Hold?”, European Journal of Sociology, 54 (1): 127-146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keynes, John M., 1930. A Treatise of Money (in two volumes) (New York, Harcourt Brace and Company).Google Scholar
Keynes, John M., 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (London, Macmillan).Google Scholar
Kim, Jongchul, 2011. “How Modern Banking Originated: The London Goldsmith-Bankers’ Institutionalisation of Trust”, Business History, 53 (6): 939-959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jongchul, 2014. “Identity and Hybridity of Modern Finance: How a Specifically Modern Concept of The Self Underlies the Modern Ownership of Property, Trusts and Finance”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38 (2): 425-446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knafo, Samuel, 2009. “Liberalisation and the Political Economy of Financial Bubbles”, Competition & Change, 13 (2), June: 128-144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knafo, Samuel, 2012. “Financial Crises and the Political Economy of Speculative Bubbles”, Critical Sociology, 39 (6): 851-867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knafo, Samuel, 2013. The Making of Modern Finance: Liberal Governance and the Gold Standard (London/New York, Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, Georg F., 1924. The State Theory of Money (London, Macmillan & Company Limited).Google Scholar
Konings, Martijn, 2010. “The Pragmatic Sources of Modern Power”, European Journal of Sociology, 51 (1): 55-91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konings, Martijn, 2011a. “Money as Icon”, Theory & Event, 14 (3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konings, Martijn, 2011b. The Development of American Finance (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavoie, Marc, 2013. “The Monetary and Fiscal Nexus of Neo-Chartalism. A Friendly Critique”, Journal of Economic Issues, 47 (1): 1-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legendre, Pierre, 2005. Della società come testo. Lineamenti di un’antropologia dogmatica (Torino, G. Giappichelli Editore).Google Scholar
Macleod, Henry D., 1883. Theory and Practice of Banking vol. I, 4th edition (London, Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer).Google Scholar
Mehrling, Perry, 2000. “Modern Money: Fiat or Credit?”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 22 (3): 397-406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minsky, Hyman, 1977. “A Theory of Systemic Fragility”, in Altman Edward, I. and Arnold W. Sametz, eds., 1977. Financial Crises: Institutions and Markets in a Fragile Environment (London, John Wiley and Sons).Google Scholar
Minsky, Hyman, 1986. Stabilizing an Unstable Economy (New Haven/London, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip, 1991. “Postmodernism and the Social Theory of Value”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 13 (4): 565-582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nesvetailova, Anastasia, 2007. Fragile Finance. Debt, speculation and Crisis in the Age of Global Credit (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Nesvetailova, Anastasia, 2010. Financial Alchemy in Crisis. The Great Liquidity Illusion (London, Pluto Press).Google Scholar
Nitzan, Jonathan and Bichler, Shimshon, 2000. “Capital Accumulation. Breaking the Dualism of ‘Economics’ and ‘Politics’”, in Palan, R., ed., Global Political Economy: Contemporary Theories (London/New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Nitzan, Jonathan and Bichler, Shimshon, 2009. Capital as Power. A Study of Order and Creorder (London/New York, Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palan, Ronen, 1998. “Trying to Have your Cake and Eating It: How and Why the State System Has Created Offshore”, International Studies Quarterly, 42: 625-644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palan, Ronen, 2002. “Tax Havens and the Commercialization of State Sovereignty”, International Organization, 56 (1): 151-176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palan, Ronen, 2013. “The Financial Crisis and Intangible Value”, Capital & Class, 37 (1): 65-77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palley, Thomas I., 2015a. “Money, Fiscal Policy, and Interest rates: A Critique of Modern Monetary Theory”, Review of Political Economy, 27 (1): 1-23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palley, Thomas I., 2015b. “The Critics of Modern Money Theory (MMT) are right”, Review of Political Economy, 27 (1): 45-61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, Karl, 1980 (1968). Economie primitive, arcaiche e moderne (Torino, Einaudi).Google Scholar
Rochon, Louis-Philippe and Vernengo, Matias, 2003. “State Money and the Real World: Or Chartalism and Its Discontents”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 26 (1): 57-67.Google Scholar
Saiag, Hadrien, 2014. “Towards a Neo-Polanyian Approach to Money: Integrating the Concept of Debt”, Economy and Society, 43 (4): 559-581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schularick, Moritz and Taylor, Alan M., 2012. “Credit Booms Gone Bust: Monetary Policy, Leverage Cycles, and Financial Crises, 1870-2008”, American Economic Review, 102 (2): 1029-1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shell, Marc, 1982. Money, Language, and Thought. Literary and Philosophic Economies from the Medieval to the Modern Era (Baltimore/London, The Johns Hopkins University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, Georg, 1990 [1907]. The Philosophy of Money (London/New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Tcherneva, Pavlina, 2006. “Chartalism and the Tax-Driven Approach to Money”, in Arestis, P. and M. Sawyer, eds., A Handbook of Alternative Monetary Economics (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
Weber, Max, 1978 [1922]. Economy and Society (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar
Wennerlind, Carl, 2001. “Money Talks, but Is It Saying? Semiotics of Money and Social Control”, Journal of Economic Issues, 35 (3): 557-574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, Richard A., 2005. New Paradigm in Macroeconomics (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, Randall, 1998. Understanding Modern Money. The Key to Full Employment and Price Stability (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
Wray, Randall, 2000. “Modern money”, in Smithin, J., ed., What is Money? (London/New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Wray, Randall, ed., 2004. Credit and State Theories of Money. The Contributions of A. Mitchell Innes (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, Randall, 2012. Modern Money Theory. A Primer on Macroeconomics for Sovereign Monetary Systems (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Zelizer, Viviana A., 2000. “Fine Tuning the Zelizer View”, Economy and Society, 29 (3): 383-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zelizer, Viviana A., 2011. Economic Lives. How Culture Shapes the Economy (Princeton/Oxford, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar