Fiat devalues marriage

adminMay 14, 2024

The following is an excerpt from Jimmy Song’s “Fiat Ruins Everything” that devalues marriage. To order print, digital, or audio copies of the book, visit the Bitcoin Magazine Store.

Love is corrupted.

In the past, love meant the virtue of being in a lasting, intimate relationship. It required sacrifice, discipline, and patience. Classical writers viewed love as a virtue because it was inherently difficult. To paraphrase the Apostle Paul, love is patient, kind, not jealous, and humble.₅₉ Developing these qualities requires tremendous inner work and self-improvement.

But today, love is often used to describe a strong feeling or desire, such as “I love ice cream” or “I love my job.” What was once the pinnacle of virtue has been reduced to expressing the intensity of fleeting emotions. The word love was more undervalued than a trophy in a children’s competition.

Despite the vulgarization of the concept of love, this essay is not simply a condemnation of language. I certainly lament the loss of meaning in words, but there are more pressing issues. Instead, this chapter will focus on the practical consequences of love’s damage to civilization: the institution of marriage.

The devaluation of love is not simply a linguistic issue. It had a profound impact on society. In particular, this has contributed to the breakdown of the family unit and the increase in high time preference behavior. High time preference refers to the tendency to prioritize short-term gratification over long-term interests, and it permeates all aspects of modern life, including human relationships.

no-fault divorce

In 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan passed America’s first no-fault divorce law.₆₀ The law aimed to reduce the bitterness surrounding divorce. Before this law was enacted, there had to be valid grounds to end a marital union. For example, if a wife wanted to end her marriage before 1969, she had to give reasons such as physical abuse or infidelity by her husband.

However, there are many people who try to break up a marriage without justifiable grounds, creating false justifications and damaging people’s character. For example, Ronald Reagan’s first wife cited mental abuse as the reason for her divorce.₆₁ No-fault divorce laws were intended to eliminate the need for false accusations, similar to the parental policy of “I don’t care who started it,” punishing both children when a fight breaks out, regardless of the actual cause.

The law quickly gained popularity, with every U.S. state adopting it within just a few years of California’s 1969 law.₆₂ Unfortunately, like many government regulations, the consequences were unintended and damaging.

Looking back over half a century, we can conclude that no-fault divorce laws have not made the divorce process less painful, but have actually made it worse.₆₃ This law did not end the general trauma caused by false accusations, personal attacks, and divorce, but it made the situation worse. While the divorce industry thrived, the institution of marriage became corrupted.₆₄ So what was wrong with this law? To explore, we must understand two historical facts about marriage.

First, marriage is fundamentally a contract or promise, traditionally centered around lifelong fidelity. This may seem limited, but it serves an important purpose of providing a stable environment for raising children. The stability of the parental union is critical to the well-being of the offspring. Marriage constraints therefore exist primarily for the benefit of children rather than to promote individual happiness.

Second, marriage has historically existed outside of government control. Government regulation of marriage is relatively recent and is largely rooted in historical attempts to prevent interracial marriage and polygamy.₆₅ To enforce these restrictions from top to bottom, marriage registration was made mandatory. No-fault divorce laws are another example of government regulation having unintended consequences, further eroding the sanctity of marriage and the stable environment it was designed to provide.

All marriages are open

In a no-fault divorce, either party can terminate the agreement without being held liable. As a result, a marriage contract cannot legally require fidelity. This is because the option of divorce is available regardless of whether one of the partners cheated. There are essentially no legal ramifications for infidelity, and the outcome of a divorce usually depends on who has a more skilled attorney, not who broke the contract.

Legally speaking, marriage has become a weak and unencumbered contract. You can certainly promise to be faithful to your partner, but there are no legal consequences for breaking that vow. From the government’s perspective, all marriages are essentially open marriages. This situation is similar to providing candy to a diabetic with every meal. This undermines the foundation of what marriage is supposed to represent.

How did we get to this point? Hasn’t fidelity always been an important aspect of marriage? Is the concept of pledging allegiance that difficult?

Historically, most instability in families was caused by external factors such as war, epidemics, and famine. Despite these challenges, marriage provided a stable environment in which children could grow up. But today, instability in families often comes from internal circumstances, and almost half of all marriages end in divorce.₆₆ And the birth rate is at an all-time low.₆₇ For many people, marriage is no longer primarily focused on raising children.

There have been significant changes in perceptions of marriage over the past century. If you talked to someone 100 years ago, the values associated with marriage would have centered around obligations to children, sacrifice for the community, and obligations to family.₆₈ In modern discussions about marriage, the conversation often turns to love. This difference in perspective is striking. One is a community-centered view of marriage, and the other is a self-centered view of marriage. We have regressed to a childish way of thinking that believes that community institutions should revolve around the needs of the individual.

L word

“Love is all you need” is not just a Beatles lyric, it is a belief that many people sincerely believe. However, considering the derogatory nature of the word love, this statement is incredibly self-centered. Most people pursue marriage for personal happiness along with the desire to experience strong feelings of love. But these feelings come from a sense of commitment, sacrifice, and responsibility that is often overlooked.

Many people want rewards without putting in effort, reflecting the fiat mindset. They want to shoot like Stephen Curry without shooting practice. Is it any wonder that they often miss the mark?

Just as excessive focus on unemployment led to the flawed reasoning of Keynesian economics, the obsession with ‘love’ at the expense of other aspects helped to devalue marriage.

When people talk about ‘love’, they are usually referring to an inner state one desires rather than the virtue itself. They want to fall “in love” or experience an emotional high similar to a sugar rush. This self-centered view dominates the modern view of marriage, transforming it into a path to personal happiness.

As mentioned above, marriage has historically been for the purpose of raising children and starting a family. These goals conflict with self-centered notions of marriage, especially when children interfere with personal happiness.

No-fault divorce essentially supported and justified the individual happiness theory of marriage. As a result, it is no surprise that birth rates are plummeting, fewer families are forming, and motherhood is being portrayed as outdated. When happiness becomes the central focus, there is little room for children. In this paradigm, concepts such as duty, order, and sacrifice lose their meaning.

*Click here to order a copy of “Fiat Is Ruining Everything: How Our Financial System Is Rigged and How Bitcoin Will Fix It” by Jimmy Song.*

Marriage value decline due to fiat currency

The corruption of money has greatly contributed to the corruption of marriage. The dollar’s separation from gold in 1971 was partly due to numerous social programs of the 1960s. LBJ’s Great Society programs, especially Medicare, put significant pressure on the dollar, leading to the 1971 decision.₆₉ Since the United States was the world’s reserve currency, it was spending money it did not have.

The program aimed to provide a social safety net for the poor. But the effect was to replace marriage, family, and community with entitlement programs. No-fault divorce laws were part of the same social trend as the Great Society programs. They sought to reduce conflict through money, and with the advent of fiat currency, individual well-being became a government obligation. In other words, fiat currency created the expectation that the government would provide happiness to the people, and the focus on happiness ultimately led to a decline in marriage.

The emphasis on individual happiness stems from the moral responsibility of the money printer. If the government can print money to solve a problem, it becomes a moral imperative. No-fault divorce and welfare programs were part of the government’s tendency to “solve” people’s problems. Fiat money made everyone a consumer of government goods rather than a producer of society, which led to an ethics based on individual happiness. Fiat money has degraded duty, responsibility, and sacrifice, which in turn has degraded marriage.

The resulting corruption of marriage hurt the poor the most. In particular, the corruption of marriage devastated the black community. In 1950, a higher percentage of black women were married by age 35 than white women.₇₀ The combination of social programs, emphasis on individual happiness, and the decadence of marriage contributed to the disintegration of the black family.₇₁ The government’s lax attitude toward marriage has become a reality for those who cannot afford to get married.

Bitcoin promotes long-term thinking

It’s encouraging to see so many people in the Bitcoin community getting married. Exploring Bitcoin encourages a long-term mindset. Adopting low-time preference behaviors with money naturally extends to other aspects of your life. One of our most important long-term concerns is finding meaning, and family provides a deep sense of purpose. Low time preference behavior promotes family formation.

This motivation stands in sharp contrast to the prevailing social mindset of pursuing individual happiness. A long-term focus creates room for sacrifice, responsibility, and commitment, but it inevitably gets overshadowed when it comes to pursuing personal happiness. Traditional views of marriage are consistent with low time preference behavior. Ancient philosophers called actions with low time preference prudence or wisdom. It is the antidote to following the dictates of a temporary emotional rush like “love.” Bitcoin helps us break away from narcissistic indulgence.

The Beatles were wrong. Love isn’t all you need.