Katharina Pistor

In this book, Colombia Law professor Katharina Pistor defines capital as an asset plus the rules, laws, or codes, that govern access to this asset. Through the perspective of this definition, Pistor unpacks how law is always biased, and always preferences the rights of some over those of others. Through this approach, she also reinforces the state theory of money.

Pistor explores a variety of case studies. Her first, which is quite enlightening, explores the Maya's quest for land tenure in Bolivia. Some of Pistor's other examples, such as the subprime mortgage crisis and Long Term Capital Management, don't seem to add much depth to the discussion (if you're looking for a book one the former, read Adam Tooze's "Crashed; on the latter, Roger Lowenstein's "When Genius Failed").

The most interesting aspects of her case arise in the way she traces the history of entities like the trust back two millennia. Did you know that Medieval Europe had an equivalent in the "use?" Or Rome, with the "peculium," a slave-operated entity?

Through an inquiry into law, Pistor reminds us that capital's existence and utilization rely fundamentally on a social contract which is mutable. And at the moment, that social contract is fatally frayed. Pistor predicts that civilization either initiates a fundamental overhaul to our laws or we will see its downfall (she cites even staid publications like "The Financial Times" calling for a renewed social contract).

The book also investigates the paradox of the mobility of capital (although she doesn't examine the inverse trend with the imprisonment of people within national borders). Almost all capital is coded in either English law, or the law of New York state (hence London and New York City's uncontested dominance as the planet's two financial centers).

In her conclusions, Pistor pits the state against smart contracts and blockchain. From my perspective, this is not an either/or situation. But Pistor's explorations up to this point are still thought-provoking even if you don't agree with her conclusions.

If you're looking for a nuanced theory about the legal origination of wealth, this is a great read.… (plus d'informations)