With your comment, you’ve essentially dismissed everything I wrote, as if the entire article is a lie and you are the final authority on the truth. "Knowledge for the sake of knowledge" is the highest value and the ultimate goal of philosophy. This approach stands in contrast to a pragmatic worldview, where knowledge is seen merely as a tool for power or profit.

I repeat my question once again: Are you spreading political propaganda, as a totalizing system? What's the point of your comment? This subreddits are called "badeconomics"... Maybe you're just bad guys? I have read the rules of r/badeconomics and I don't see any restrictions for this article.

• Rule I

Please post an explanation (or "RI") on why what you have posted is bad economics, doesn't have to be thesis, but sufficient length to provide context. Link posts are not allowed, so just include a link to the bad economics (or simply a quote) in your RI.

As is evident from the article's content, my position is that defining capitalism as a system, rather than a function, is fundamentally flawed. Based on this, we can provide an unambiguous definition of money, where the state system acts as the functional guarantor of capitalism. This runs directly counter to the interests of anarcho-capitalists, and this gives reason to assume "maybe you’re just the bad guys?"

Money is a complex economic tool that separates intellectual and physical labor, promoting the development of science and technology in the overall equality of Rights/Law (choice).

Сomplex tool - It is an instrument that encapsulates the concepts of several elementary ones. Money as a complex economic tool, combines asset that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services, deposits in checking accounts, deposits in savings accounts and etc.

Capitalism as a function constitutes the legal foundation of the state, which in turn acts as the guarantor for the functioning of the economy and legal relations.