Social Omniequivalence

The money I have in my wallet consists in paper notes, or bank notes. These notes have a
monetary value, which belongs to me. However, the notes themselves do not belong to me (I
have no right to destroy them). They are public: they belong to society. While their monetary
value is private: it belongs to me or else to whoever controls its representing notes.
Any such notes represent money. This money they represent is their own identity to the
exchange value of any commodity: their social omniequivalence.
That represented identity or social omniequivalence is the ultimate concept of money. Only with
this concept we can fully understand commercial and central banking. Whether private, if
commercial, or public, if central, banking is the modern form of debt monetization: the process
by which money becomes debt.
1
Hence private and public banking being the causes of modern
inflation, booms and busts, deflation, and monetary crises.
Individual and Social Omniequivalence
Omniequivalence is the equivalence of an object to all commodities. That equivalence can either
be social (money) or individual. Recognizing money to be just social (as opposed to individual)
omniequivalence is beginning to learn that:
No single object necessarily represents money.
Not all money constitutes debt.
2

All debt monetization (including private and public banking) results from confusing an
actual monetary value (monetary identity) with its representing object.
That confusion between the identity of money and its representation is a representational
monetary identity.
Multiequivalence
Whether individual or social, omniequivalence has a general and a generic aspect. In its general
aspect, it is the same as multiequivalence. Finally, understanding omniequivalence as generic (or
multiequivalence as omniequivalence) requires understanding omnistitution.
1. Since banking is always private, public banking requires the privatization of public
interests. []
2. If A has an ounce of gold and a pair of shoes worth two ounces of gold and B has two
ounces of gold and a knife worth an ounce of gold, A can give B a pair of shoes while B
gives A a knife and an ounce of gold. In this example, A and B always own three ounces
of gold each, in both monetary (golden) and commodity form, and never owe each other
anything. []