The following is an excerpt from Jimmy Song’s “Fiat Ruins Everything” where he disparages marriage. Visit the Bitcoin Magazine store to order a print, digital or audio copy of the book.
Love has been devalued.
In the past, love referred to the virtues that existed in lasting, intimate relationships. It requires sacrifice, discipline and patience. Classical writers viewed love as a virtue because of its inherent difficulties. In the words of the apostle Paul, love is patient, kind, not jealous, and humble.59 Developing these qualities requires a lot of inner work and self-improvement.
Today, however, love is often used to describe any 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 the intensity of expressing fleeting emotions. In children’s competitions, the word “love” is devalued even more than the trophy.
While the concept of love has been trivialized, this article is more than just a diatribe about language. I certainly regret that language has lost its meaning, but there are more pressing issues at hand. Instead, this chapter will focus on the practical consequences of love’s debasement of civilization—the institution of marriage.
The devaluation of love is not just a matter of language; It has had a profound impact on society. In particular, it leads to the breakdown of the family unit and the rise of highly time-preferred behaviors. High time preference refers to the tendency to prioritize short-term gratification over long-term interests, and it has permeated every aspect of modern life, including interpersonal relationships.
No-fault divorce
In 1969, while serving as governor of California, Reagan passed the first law of its kind in the United States, the no-fault divorce law.60 The law was designed to make divorce less painful. Prior to its enactment, there must be valid grounds for terminating a marriage. For example, if a wife wanted a divorce before 1969, she would need to provide a reason, such as physical abuse or infidelity by her husband.
However, many people seek divorce without valid reasons, resulting in fabricated grounds and defamation of character. For example, Regan’s first wife cited emotional abuse as the reason for divorce.61 No-fault divorce laws are designed to eliminate the need for such false accusations, similar to a parent’s “I don’t care who started it first” policy, and punish both children in a fight, regardless of the actual reason.
The law quickly gained popularity and was adopted by every state in the United States, many within just a few years of California’s 1969 enactment of the law.62 Unfortunately, like many government regulations, the results are unintended and damaging.
With more than half a century of hindsight, we can confidently conclude that no-fault divorce laws do not reduce the pain of divorce proceedings but actually make them worse.63 Rather than stamping out false accusations, character attacks, and the overall trauma associated with divorce, this law makes it worse. The divorce industry thrived while the institution of marriage was devalued.64 So, what’s wrong with this law? To explore, we need to understand two historical facts about marriage.
First, marriage is fundamentally a contract or commitment, traditionally centered around lifelong fidelity. While this may seem restrictive, it serves an important purpose: to provide a stable environment for raising children. The stability of parental marriage is crucial to the well-being of offspring, so the constraints of marriage are primarily designed to benefit children rather than promote personal happiness.
Second, marriage has historically existed outside of government control. Government regulation of marriage is a relatively new development, stemming largely from historical attempts to prevent interracial marriage and polygamy.65 To enforce these restrictions from the top down, marriage registration became compulsory. No-fault divorce laws are another example of government regulation having unintended consequences, further eroding the sanctity of marriage and the stable environment it is designed to provide.
Every marriage is open
In a no-fault divorce, either party can terminate the contract without being held liable. Therefore, a marriage contract cannot legally require fidelity because divorce is an option regardless of whether one party has cheated or not. Essentially, there are no legal consequences for infidelity, and the outcome of a divorce often depends on who has the more skilled attorney, rather than who breaks the agreement.
Legally speaking, marriage has become a weak and undemanding contract. While you can certainly promise to remain faithful to your partner, there are no legal consequences for breaking that vow. From the government’s perspective, all marriages are essentially open marriages. This situation is like giving candy to a diabetic with every meal, it destroys the foundation of what marriage stands for.
How did we get here? Hasn’t fidelity always been an important aspect of marriage? Is the concept of pledging loyalty so challenging?
Historically, family instability has mostly resulted from external factors such as war, plague, or famine. Despite these challenges, marriage provides a stable environment in which children can thrive.Today, however, family instability often stems from internal circumstances, with nearly half of marriages ending in divorce66 and fertility rates at record lows.67 For many, marriage is no longer primarily focused on raising children.
Over the past century, there has been a significant shift in how people think about marriage. If you talked to someone from 100 years ago, you would find that the values associated with marriage would have centered around responsibility for children, sacrifice for community, and obligation to family.68 In contemporary discussions of marriage, the topic often turns to love. The difference between these perspectives is striking. One is a community-centered view of marriage, and the other is a self-centered view of marriage. We have retreated into the childish mindset that public institutions should revolve around our personal desires.
L word
“Love is all you need” is not just a Beatles lyric, but a true belief held by many. However, given the pejorative connotation of the word “love,” this statement is extremely self-centered. For most people, marriage is a pursuit of personal happiness and a desire to experience a strong feeling of love. However, these feelings often arise from commitment, sacrifice, and responsibility that are often overlooked.
Many people only seek rewards without putting in the effort, which reflects the legal mentality. They’re eager to shoot like Stephen Curry without any shooting practice. Is it any wonder that they often fall short of their goals?
Just as an excessive focus on unemployment led to erroneous reasoning in Keynesian economics, an obsession with “love” at the expense of other aspects has led to the devaluation of marriage.
When people discuss “love,” they are usually referring to the inner state of their desire 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 contemporary views of marriage, transforming it into a path to personal happiness.
As mentioned above, marriage has historically been about raising children and building a family. This goal conflicts with a self-centered view of marriage, especially if children interfere with personal happiness.
No-fault divorce essentially endorses and legitimizes the personal happiness theory of marriage. It’s no surprise, then, that birth rates are plummeting, fewer families are being formed, and motherhood is portrayed as an outdated phenomenon. When happiness is the focus, there is little room for the child. Within this paradigm, concepts such as obligation, order, and sacrifice lose their meaning.
Fiat Currency Destroys Marriage
The devaluation of money has largely contributed to the devaluation of marriage. The dollar’s break with gold in 1971 was partly due to the numerous social programs of the 1960s. In particular, Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs such as Medicare put intense pressure on the dollar, leading to the 1971 decision.69 The United States is spending money it doesn’t have because it is the global reserve currency.
These programs are designed to provide a social safety net for the poor. However, their effect is to replace marriage, family and community with a scheme of rights. No-fault divorce laws and Great Society programs are part of the same social trend. They tried to reduce conflict through money, and with the advent of fiat currency, individual well-being became the task of government. In other words, fiat currency creates an expectation that the government will provide happiness to its people, and a focus on happiness ultimately devalues marriage.
The emphasis on personal happiness stems from the moral responsibility of those who print money. If the government can solve a problem by printing money, it quickly becomes a moral obligation. No-fault divorce and welfare programs are part of a trend of government “solving” problems for the people. Fiat currency makes everyone a consumer of government goods rather than a producer for society, which leads to an ethics based on individual happiness. Fiat currency devalues obligation, responsibility, and sacrifice, and by extension, marriage.
The subsequent debasement of marriage hurts the poor most. In particular, the devaluation of marriage has devastated black communities. In 1950, a higher proportion of black women than white women were married before age 35.70 A combination of social programs, an emphasis on individual happiness, and a devaluation of marriage led to the disintegration of the black family.71 For those least able to afford marriage, the government’s lax attitude toward marriage has become a reality.
Bitcoin promotes long-term thinking
It’s really encouraging to see many people in the Bitcoin community getting married. Digging deeper into Bitcoin encourages long-term thinking. When you engage in low time preference behavior with money, it naturally extends to other areas of your life. One of the most important long-term concerns is the search for meaning, and family provides a deep sense of purpose. Low time preference behavior is conducive to family formation.
This motivation contrasts sharply with the prevailing social mentality of pursuing personal happiness. By focusing on the long term, there is room for sacrifice, responsibility and commitment, which are inevitably overshadowed in the pursuit of personal happiness. Traditional views of marriage are consistent with low time preference behavior. Ancient philosophers called low time preference behavior prudence or wisdom. This is the antidote to chasing fleeting emotional impulses like “love.” Bitcoin helps us escape from narcissistic self-indulgence.
The Beatles were wrong. Love is not all you need.
Ten things you wouldn’t do for love
– 1 –
Put away your phone and experience life, because with Wi-Fi, who needs connections between people?
– 2 –
Putting up with your partner gaining weight or losing their job because they make your appearance more important than your commitment.
– 3 –
Uninstall Tinder because swiping left and right on strangers is a required option for external verification.
– 4 –
Sell your awesome MMORPG characters on eBay because your virtual self has more experience points and cooler mounts than your real-life relationship.
– 5 –
Deadlift, because you can’t possibly do something sustained and difficult.
– 6 –
Skip the bar, because who needs a healthy liver and a clear mind when you can have tequila shots and questionable decision-making skills?
– 7 –
Have a baby, because avoiding minivan rides and endless diaper changes for the next few years is more important than your legacy.
– 8 –
Stay on the ketogenic diet for more than a few months because pizza is your love language.
– 9 –
Sit down boring dates like opera or pottery classes because there’s nothing more important than entertainment.
– 10 –
Save money and get out of debt, because nothing says romance more than being overwhelmed by crushing financial stress and never-ending credit card bills.
