ABSTRACT
Just how the state is constituted is a matter for political theory rather than for the phenomenology of money. It is sufficient for the analysis of the monetary role of the state that its coercive authority extends to the monetary affairs of those subject to it. It is convenient to regard the state as a corporation of which its subjects are members, though this must not be taken to imply that the members necessarily have any democratic rights. There is nothing to prevent the state, as a corporation,1 engaging in exchange transactionswhether or not involving the use of money-on the basis of balanced reciprocity; and this is, indeed, characteristic of one side of the state’s economic activities, if only in the sphere of international trade and finance.2 In monetary terms it is the use by the state of its coercive authority to assure its own needs that distinguishes it from any other corporation.3
