Skip to main content

Abstract

As my economics training began in the Institutionalist tradition, I was exposed from the start to the view that money is not a ‘thing’ but rather an institution. This meant more than the obvious fact that most of our ‘money supply’ is issued by private bank ‘institutions’. Institutionalists define institutions broadly to include socialized patterns of behaviour or even thought. Dudley Dillard was foremost among Institutionalists for emphasizing that money is an institution. However, I have to admit that exactly what is meant by the phrase ‘money is a social relation’ was left rather hazy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Geoffrey Ingham, ‘The Emergence of Capitalist Credit Money’, in Wray (ed.), Credit and State Theories of Money: The Contributions of A. Mitchell Innes. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2004, pp. 173–222 (p. 179). This follows the argument he had previously made in his 1996 article ‘Money is a Social Relation’, Review of Social Economy, 54(4), 507–29, and ‘“Babylonian Madness”: On the Sociological and Historical “Origins” of Money’, in John Smithin (ed.), What is Money? London and New York: Routledge, 2000, pp 16–41. The latter chapter was the first piece that exposed me to Geoff’s work.

    Google Scholar 

  2. The best place to start for a sociological approach to money is with Geoffrey Ingham, The Nature of Money. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See also Wray (ed.), Credit and State Theories of Money: The Contributions of A. Mitchell Innes. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004 for a number of contributions that counter the story told by economists.

    Google Scholar 

  4. George Lakoff, Don’t Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme, and Jack Balin, Cultural Software: A Theory of Ideology. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See Philip Grierson, The Origins of Money. London: The Athlone Press, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  7. also see L. Randall Wray, Understanding Modern Money: The Key to Full Employment and Price Stability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See, for example, Dudley Dillard, ‘A Monetary Theory of Production: Keynes and the Institutionalists’, Journal of Economic Issues, 14 (1980): 255–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Charles Goodhart, ‘Two Concepts of Money: Implications for the Analysis of Optimal Currency Areas’, European Journal of Political Economy, 14(1998): 407–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. J. Fagg Foster, ‘The Reality of the Present and the Challenge of the Future’, Journal of Economic Issues, 15(4) (1981): 1963.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2013 L. Randall Wray

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wray, L.R. (2013). A New Meme for Money. In: Pixley, J., Harcourt, G.C. (eds) Financial Crises and the Nature of Capitalist Money. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137302953_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics