People can coordinate their plans in a literal sense: gather and discuss which common goal is best to put joint efforts toward, what resources to use for this, where to obtain them, and finally, how to distribute the value gained from achieving the common goal among themselves. This is a complex but solvable task; however, it usually requires a consistently well-functioning collective, and as it grows, communication problems expand until they bury any initiatives. Some problems can be solved through the offsetting of obligations. However, this method is inconvenient as the number of participants increases, and thus money gradually comes to the forefront.
There are various theories on the origin of money, but at the present moment, the main task it performs is the ability to measure, store, and transfer value, physically separating it from specific consumer goods. As a result, for example, it becomes possible to hire a person to perform an intermediate operation in a complex production chain and reward them for specific work long before the product is finally produced. Moreover, this allows even those who have absolutely no need for the product themselves to be involved in its production—instead of a share of the produced goods, they are willing to simply receive money.
Thanks to this mechanism, a very deep division of labor arises, along with immense production flexibility and a developed labor market. It is money that allows for the accumulation of value and its subsequent exchange for capital goods. This specific function of money leads to the dominance of commodity-money relations in society. A social system in which commodity-money relations dominate is called capitalism.
It should be noted that the dominance of commodity-money relations does not in itself guarantee that such a society will be fully based on libertarian principles. For example, some people in it may be forced by power into labor at a price far below the market rate; in other words, be enslaved. For those who use slave labor, the savings on payment may exceed the additional costs of coercion. That is, slavery may prove to be more economically efficient than free hiring.
Thus, for a capitalist society to move toward increasing freedom (i.e., a wider spread of libertarian principles), it is required that the costs of coercion grow faster than the productivity of forced labor. And for such an outstripping growth of coercion costs, it is required that someone successfully resist coercion: either the coerced themselves, or also some third parties.
However, besides direct coercion to labor, systematic robbery may also be practiced in society, and capitalism itself does not become an obstacle to this. The organizers of the robbery can equally hire workers to perform the tasks of seizing value, and these workers, instead of a share of the looted goods, will simply receive market payment for their labor. The general trend toward increased labor productivity will also make labor under coercion more productive.
Thus, a capitalist society is by no means guaranteed to move toward increasing freedom. On the contrary, the opposite process is quite likely, where tools of coercion will develop and be implemented more widely. Furthermore, market mechanisms will facilitate the selection of such tools of coercion that are harder to resist. For instance, methods of robbery have evolved significantly from irregular raids to indirect taxes, including such as the issuance of unsecured money.
In the next section, we will briefly outline which mechanisms can help society move toward fuller adherence to libertarian principles, as well as counteract attempts to roll back to less free practices.