Doubledee

Could it be tied to alienation? That land could be alienated and turned into a commodity is not self evident, and because land is literally fundamental to sedentary societies by the time anyone would have the idea it has probably been enmeshed in the social existence of the entire community and thus not easy to take private control of. A desperate laborer can alienate their own labor unilaterally, but a desperate farmer can't alienate land that is collectively worked by a village.

You'd need to suddenly appropriate land, like Henry VIII did to the catholic church, for there to be an alienated chunk of it that has no social resistance and can be disposed of in a simple transaction between owners of commodities.

I made it all the way through three without realizing I was supposed to stop. I guess it just felt like I needed to finish getting the idea.

Now the extent to which I understood everything? Not sure about that, but also not sure how much of my confusion is bourgeois economics insisting something is wrong.

I also had a hard time getting the 'well this is fine and good for the 1800s but my money is fiat, how does this apply' idea out of my head while I was reading. But I think somewhere in the credit money part I started to be able to peer through at something that made more sense to me, even if I can't quite articulate it yet. At some point you just have to remind yourself that he's talking in the abstract about the economy as an aggregate, so your specific case objections are probably not the most useful way of trying to understand what's happening.

Thought it was really interesting reading money as an indication of the pace of social exchange of commodities, turned the common sense on its head. I think maybe I missed WHY the quantity of money in circulation is so important to him, he kept coming back to ways the supply could change which makes me think it matters a lot to him, but other than 'if the circulation gets disrupted we have the ingredients for a crisis' I didn't really get any foreshadowed point that all this emphasis would seem to merit.

To be fair,

1. They're throwing snowe under the bus and openly blame them for it further down. This is a bit of context that I guess is kinda excusing it, although in my opinion your third party program messing up an interaction with someone is a problem that could easily be resolved by realizing you made a mistake and fixing it, which snowe of course didn't do. So maybe they're giving too much credit to a bad admin but I don't think they're really defending the behavior.

2. I think the triggered has an unclear antecedent, but I read it as "a branch of the conversation was triggered (as in caused/set off)" not "a user was triggered."

That said, I don't really have strong feelings about programming.dev. They don't seem to show up here much but it's a mixed bag when they do.

No no you don't understand! Before they hit them with the missiles they told everyone to evacuate to another area! Now granted that area they were told to go to was then bombed, ensuring civilians who were complying with their directives were killed and making it less likely that anyone would follow later warnings, but still!

The whole human shield angle is really stupid if you ever pay attention to how much the Zionists care about civilian casualties. We're at what, 1.5 War-in-Ukraines of dead Palestinian civilians in 3 months? It seems like civilians don't function as a deterrent to the IOF.

If you're looking for a system I can recommend Akers' Comrades with some caveats.

It's a bit rules light and you need a party that's confident making decisions with a little scaffolding more than strict limits, which might make it tough for some who are new to TT.

It also sometimes feels like it wasn't all playtested. You may need to adapt some rules on the fly because there are little gaps occasionally, things like that.

But that said, you can have characters drop in and out for most missions because you're playing a cadre so no one is indispensable, and it's setting agnostic. My group is doing a WWI era lord of the rings situation where they simultaneously want to overthrow the dark lord and not fall prey to the "good guys" who want to eradicate everyone else. It comes with suggested settings too if homebrewing is too much work.

I can't necessarily commit to more right now but I will be keeping eyes on your project as it goes, maybe I can join you folks later.

EDIT: For an idea of how it works you could check out Red Game Table/Matryoshka, they are running a different iteration of the same overarching system, both are 'Powered by the Apocalypse' games.

It serves as both a store of value and a means of exchange. Fascinating.

It was up front a day or two ago, then it must have been unlinked or something.

No no you don't understand! The proper way to attempt to address an ongoing genocide is to wring your hands and give more weapons to the people doing it. Doing anything proactive is bad form you silly geese.

Can we get a Greenwald emoji from this nightmare portrait? He looks like he's intentionally giving a villain face after he stabbed you in the chest and pushed you off a building.

Okay. I'm sure it will be made clear, it just seems like, from this chapter, money being a commodity is a necessary attribute for it to fill the role of an equivalent. But maybe this is just describing how money emerges, first as a commodity and then as the contrasting realities of value develop it can be applied more abstractly?