The Sacred Rents: A Recipe for Civilisation or Catastrophe?
The Sacred Rents: A Recipe for Civilisation or Catastrophe?
Historians and archaeologists have long debated the mysterious decline and eventual extinction of great civilisations. While there is no academic consensus, a comparative analysis of ancient, classical, and modern societies suggests a singular, recurring theme: the management of “sacred rents”.
The Foundation of Civilisation
Civilisation originally became possible because people voluntarily agreed to pool their net income—the “sacred rents”—for the common good. This collective investment funded the infrastructure that made urban expansion possible, creating two distinct types of power:
Hard Power: This was made possible by investing resources in physical infrastructure, such as the waterways of Babylon in the Near East, the amphitheatres of classical Greece, and the expansive highways of ancient Rome.
Soft Power: The sacred income enhanced the spiritual and intellectual experience. It provided the funding to build temples, the time for figures like Socrates to philosophise, and the resources for early scientific experimentation.
When merged, these powers created a sustainable civilisation.
The Path to Collapse
The decline of a civilisation begins when these sacred rents are privatised. When individuals divert collective wealth for personal “self-aggrandisement” rather than the common good, the vitality and creativity of the society dissipate.
As this energy ebbs away, governments are forced to start taxing the productive labour of the population, which suppresses economic capacity. This creates a “recipe for catastrophe”: the combination of privatised rents and the taxation of labour leads to eventual collapse.
A New Paradigm for the Modern Era
Today, our globalised civilisation is arguably being held up by “scaffolding” known as quantitative easing—a desperate expansion of the money supply to keep an unsustainable economy afloat. International financial institutions admit the current system is failing, yet they remain paralysed by a lack of known alternatives.
A potential solution lies in an organic shift towards a new model of tax reform. The proposal involves:
Reducing Taxes on Wages: Progressively lowering the burden on people who go to work.
Shifting to Annual Ground Rents: Based on Adam Smith’s concept, raising revenue from land rents rather than labour or entrepreneurial profits.
In the UK, it is estimated that this shift could expand the economy by £500 billion. Across the EU, replacing VAT with a ground rent charge could increase the economy by €1 trillion. This approach is supported by bedrock principles in classical economics, confirmed by figures like Joseph Stiglitz, as it inflicts no distortions on the economy.
The Resistance of Power
History shows that even when presented with a rational path to salvation, those in power often resist.
France: Louis XVI rejected Turgot’s proposal to raise revenue from the rent of land, leading to the end of the Ancien RĂ©gime via the guillotine.
Russia: Nicholas II ignored Leo Tolstoy’s warnings to reduce the burden on peasants through land rent reform, eventually resulting in the Russian Revolution.
China: The Qing dynasty rejected Sun Yat-sen’s “Three Principles of the People,” which included rebalancing the revenue system, leading to the birth of the Republic in 1911.
The ultimate obstacle remains the same today: power rests with those who control the rent. To evolve, a democracy must find a way for its people to reclaim the right to determine how their collective revenue is raised.
Comments
Post a Comment