Kinda. It’s not a very efficient market, but a market doesn’t have to be efficient to be a market.
I guess technically any system of trade could be thought of as a capital market, as long as capital is for sale.
Comment on We live in a post scarcity information society and we still haven't moved on from capitalism.
betheydocrime@lemmy.world 7 months agoDoes the exchange of land between kingdoms via wedding dowries/treaties/violence fulfill the definition of a “market for capital”?
intensely_human@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
Not really. Capitalism allows anyone to buy and sell Capital, whereas these more primitive exchanges aren’t the same. The Bourgeoisie are fundamentally different from the Aristocracy.
betheydocrime@lemmy.world 7 months ago
That’s pretty fair. It may feel impossible for me today to afford any capital, but if I were somehow able to accumulate enough money I would be legally allowed to own capital. Under monarchy, even if I got that much money, it would be illegal for me to purchase capital as an individual. That’s enough of a distinction to make them different for me, thanks for bringing it up.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
Yep, that’s the idea! Functionally, Capitalism is more revolutionary and progressive than Feudalism, which is why it’s a good thing that Feudalism is fading and Capitalism is the status quo, just like it will also be a good thing when Capitalism is fading and Socialism becomes the status quo.