We have paper money today because it functioned as an IOU, certifying that the holder could redeem it for an equivalent amount of physical gold or silver from the bank's vault. That’s where the English pound got its name as it matched a specific weight of gold (or silver). This was the gold standard, and this is how banks operated for centuries. But it was largely abandoned after World War I, when governments prevented the withdrawal of gold by suspending the convertibility of their paper money into gold to conserve national gold reserves for purchasing vital war supplies and to allow central banks to print money for financing massive military expenditures. Governments abandoned linking their money to anything at all, giving central banks full control over the money supply. Printing money has led to inflation, national debt, and financial instability, which ultimately fueled the creation of cryptocurrency like Bitcoin as a decentralized, mathematically-scarce alternative.

What if things hadn’t happened this way? What if the gold standard survived the Great War? Today’s guest, Saifedean Ammous , imagines this scenario in his new book The Gold Standard: An Alternate Economic History of the 20th Century.” The story begins with a fictional divergence in 1911: French aviation pioneer Louis Blériot partners with the Wright brothers to create the Blériot Transport Corporation (BTC), an airplane-based, peer-to-peer gold-settlement network. This innovative system quickly becomes a secure alternative to central banks. When World War I starts, the BTC offers Europeans a way to export their wealth to neutral countries, escaping central bank war inflation. This triggers a global financial panic in September 1915, bankrupting the world's central banks, abruptly ending the war, and strangling fiat money in its cradle. With the collapse of central banking and the establishment of a free-market, decentralized gold standard, a radically different 20th century unfolds. Hard-money savings become plentiful and cheap, accelerating technological progress, increasing energy production, and fostering a world of appreciating money and declining prices.

Without the ability to print money to fund expansive projects, governments become more accountable, transforming into mere service providers whose citizens expect better service at a lower cost. This thought-provoking narrative suggests that the absence of central bank financing could have prevented major 20th-century conflicts, eliminated chronic inflation, and ushered in a "Century of Affluence" based on lower time preference, long-term investment, and voluntary governance.