Oddbean new post about login | logout It’s a common myth I see touted in the Bitcoin community that going down the bitcoin rabbit hole will make you less of a progressive. For me that’s not true at all. It did, however, raise my awareness and skepticism of centralized authorities like the federal government, the Fed, etc in terms of handling our money and given too much control to breach our privacy in any instance. I think it is true that more often than not progressives don’t push back on centralized government authority and interference enough, and look to often to the federal government for support of the community and social values we care about. Basically I went from not questioning centralizing enough to fighting for decentralization in as many instance as make sense — this is progressive in the sense of greater individual/community control, more democratic, more with everyone playing by the same rules. Do you want a world ruled by centralized authorities in every instance, or a world where rules without rulers and decentralized protocols usher in a new era or freedom, liberty, and harmony? This is the message I’m hoping to spread to more progressives. And in terms of educating on money, federal governments, privacy, and decentralization I think @LynAlden , @Jameson Lopp & @Snowden are some of the best to speak to progressives on these topics without getting bogged down in ideological warfare
Bitcoin *is* progressive.
Lol, far from it. Bitcoin is conservative. It remains to be seen if the shit-lib progressives will undermine through attacks on POW etc...
Bitcoin is all about extreme market economy. And I love that. ❤️ And If you want to call it ”progressive” be my guest.
Bitcoin isn’t any one thing. Bitcoin is a tool, and I believe one that champions of progressive values can utilize to bring about greater purchasing power, property rights, self-sovereignty, and community led change. Bitcoin as a tool for those in marginalized communities, I mean come on when are folks going to wake up and see that?! Hopefully soon.
It is as perfect money we’ve ever seen. And that is not compatible with leftist ideology. It just isn’t.
Is totalitarian communism the only “leftist” ideology you see? …
No. There is fascism and national socialism too.
Fascism is not left Well anyway I’m speaking about values and not getting too bogged down in historical systems. The future I want is decentralized and I don’t think any government organizing has done this or cares to at this point. We’re ushering in a new era and we can all work together on this 🤝
It is collectivism, you cannot deny that even If you want to call it ”extreme right”. As national socialism As communism. As socialism in general. Bitcoin is individualism and voluntary cooperation. VOLUNTARY.
The left has rich ideals of community. But both the right and left in governments have used force, control, power. I prefer centralized v decentralized. This is the new era we are in. I appreciate @walker and @ODELL for beating those drums, even if I may not agree with them politically on everything doesn’t matter. They’re right that the battle is not right v left It’s centralized v decentralized. Orange v green (not as crazy about that analogy but I’ll take it)
The consequences of a fully applied bitcoin economy is a night mare for socialists. So If you define yourself as a socialist(in the standard definition of it) then you would not appreciate the consequences. But If you think like Ayn Rand and for some reason want to call yourself ”socialist”, then you would.
Why is it so hard to understand that we can have BOTH sound money and strong social programs? This is not an either/or.
It is possible only and only in a society were all the citizens are devout socialists. And maybe there will evolve such societies. I will NOT inhabit such a place.
Strong disagree. But hopefully we get a chance to find out.
What do you disagree with? That I in a world based on the bitcoin standard won’t inhabit a socialist society? Or that maybe there will exist such societies?
That it requires 100% devout socialism to enact any social programs. It only takes 51% of people to want SOME social programs (roads, sewers, firefighters, education, probably military, maybe healthcare if we’re lucky) and to vote for them. With sound money governments can’t print money (inflation is essentially an invisible tax on the poor and disenfranchised anyway), so the only other option is to enact taxes (ideally on the rich) to pay for the programs. I’m not talking “socialize all means of production” here. Hopefully, we’ll have a Bitcoin standard in our lifetime. It’ll be a rough transition and there will be turmoil and upheaval. But when the dust settles, we’ll see if/how people will choose to take care of each other. I’m an optimist. I think people will choose to take care of each other.
You don’t hear yourself, do you? Tax ”ideally the rich”….. because the tyranny of 51% And when the last ”rich” has abandoned your precious ”just” society, what will you do then? I know, you just close the borders for the remaining ”rich” who are not showing enough ”solidarity” for ”the cause”.. Socialism is evil. Fuck it. Bitcoin fixes this.
So I was right. We strongly disagree. We’ll see.
Yes. I despise socialism. And I feel sorry for people that believe in this EVIL ideology.
With sound money 1) you can’t know exactly how rich someone is who doesn’t want to share that information with you voluntarily, 2) you can’t force anyone, rich or poor, to involuntarily pay taxes they don’t want to pay. So how does your system work then, if not he rich your system wants to tax says “no” other than centralizing the power to…oh, Idunno, say 51%, to force them? Tell me, then what do you have?
You're just a special kind of stupid
I realize you may see “progressive” and want to scream. I may not be the “progressive” you imagine, because bitcoin ushers in a new era. Scream at me all you want, but I’m on team bitcoin and better world for humanity. I don’t think that’s stupid 🤙🏻
Someone asked Jeff Booth the worst thing about bitcoin we must accept. His reply was something in regards to how someone who dislike or don’t agree with Will own bitcoin, you have to accept that and accept that everyone who owns it benefits everyone else regardless of world view.
We don’t use the word, but Bitcoiners strongly disliking the IMF, World Bank, Fed, CFA, UN, Cantillon effect beneficiaries, fiat finance, authoritarianism, financial abuse of the developing world, US hegemony and interventionism et al. are expressing a political opinion that it’d totally be reasonable to call “Progressive” – against inequity, exploitation, colonialism, repression, injustice. It’s just that those from a Libertarian background don’t use that vocabulary and are conditioned to dislike those who do because it often comes packaged with non-voluntarist/statist socialism. Bitcoin and the Occupy movement had an affinity for each-other because of this common ground - the progressive aspect of Bitcoin is undeniable
I grapple with this a fair bit. Globally I see bitcoin as far more progressive than what ever we currently have. Nationally I think redistribution is important and hope this can be achieved on top of bitcoin in some way. Ie. Building roads that everyone can use, my favourite type or redistribution. Then I seem to contradict myself and ask the question how do smaller states fair under this new standard? Do they become more vulnerable to exploitation and further behind? The only way the don't is with a global presence commited to act in these instances. Then is redistribution not important at the global level too? How would this look?
Good points. Not enough people in bitcoin like to talk about any sort of taxation, support, services, public goods, etc. we can have bitcoin and live in reality too. And also that’s why I like to say we need to throw out this system and establish a new one THEN we can maybe start to try to address some of these things? And bitcoin can be an effective tool, but some issues of power, greed, the human condition, mental illness, etc are different stories…
Agreed the entire thing needs rebuilding. During the collapse/exit event though it's hard to see wealthy nations/individual actors not getting out first and consolidating further. Creating an entire new class, the Bitcoin class and the others just pass around their change(sats - or fractions of sats). Maybe then everything else is so devalued in comparison to Bitcoin that the others class can start again on a fairer standard. Shitttt
I too enter the space from the progressive side, bitcoin is not tethered to any political ideology. It’s akin to aliens giving us something that makes all previous ideologies obsolete. Before one lists libertarian principles with bitcoin, ask yourself this question. If bitcoin causes prices to fall forever because of the gains of technology which get passed to all of society that in itself is a left leaning principle. Bitcoin is the best of all principles because it anchors money, once you do that all previous ideologies get thrown out the window.
I think a key thing for non Bitcoin progressives to come to understand is that the redistribution of the billion class they/we seek cannot even begin until the money has been anchored.
People think that this transition will be easier for the rich because they have the capital to buy bitcoin. I contend it’s harder for them. If you buy into the idea that all monopolies go inward many will fall on their sword. The poor have nothing to lose and just will exist the rich system. Bitcoin far more of a bottom up technology.
How are progressive policies even affordable without fiat?
You could say the same for “the right” None of it is. There needs be be a soft transition to a bitcoin standard. A soft landing 😉 But there probably won’t be :/
Typical Lefty. When you don't want to answer the question directly, point to the worst example of your enemy.
I talk progressive values. I’m may not agree with certain government policies, as you would know from my writings and other notes. I don’t have answers for a lot of these things yet but I argue the system is not working. I’m talking things out in real time on nostr You’re trolling and labeling. I don’t have enemies based on labels of individual people. Everyone is caught up in this system It’s not right v left
Exactly. Liberal policies are to print money and use it to make lives better for the poor and disenfranchised. (Which they sometimes do.) Conservative policies are to print money and give it to the rich and powerful. (Which they always do.) If neither can print money, then they both will have to cut their welfare policies and/or raise taxes. It’s easy to inflate the currency, which is essentially an invisible tax on the poor and disenfranchised. It’s harder to actually raise taxes, particularly on the poor and disenfranchised, because it’s more visible and, by definition, they don’t have much money. And there’s a lot of them and some of them tend to vote. In a Bitcoin standard, if we want any programs that benefit all of society, there’s only one solution: Tax the fucking rich.
Its a good question, and the answer is it is only 'affordable' with massive pain to the vast majority of your population. I guess if were talking about progressive ideals like ' health is a human right ' , ' UBI', ' college for all', ' minimum wage', etc. Then layer in reality of a highly indebted society and now you are really getting taken for a ride if you vote for any of the above. I think it would help me if Trey you had a bit more of a definition to your meaning for the word progressive in your ongoing dialogue around this idea. Maybe its just semantics but i dont see how money that is meant to disintermediate the state's central control over people isn't anti-thetical entirely to the progressive movement as-is.
I agree woth you, as a former cookie cutter liberal pre-bitcoin. In fact, I typically agree with your takes 100% except for the use of the word progressive itself. Whether we like it or not, to be a progressive ( speaking from my experiencece in the US ) is really, really hard to unwind from State-Centric policy. I live in the PNW, all of my friends are very, very progressive. They simply do not see the disenfranchising of the state as a means to achieve ideals and goals they find important. This makes it almost impossible for them to see my means to achieve any goals ( as a bitcoiner) as anything but a threat and lunacy. So i just fail to see the connection with the word Progressive any longer, personally. Sometimes a feel like you are holding on too much to that word, friend. Again your take is 100% right and i dont want to distract from its value ...for me personally its liberalizing to untether myself from the Progressive ideal entirely ( albeit hard at times too as i am a bit 'adrift' now. Cheers mate keep posting 🤙
I hear you and feel that so strongly and go back and forth constantly with the word. I think my continued use of it stems from wanting those pre-bitcoiner progressives we know to not buy into the FUD from the left around bitcoin, so a bit of marketing in terms of @TPBPod etc. and I want so badly to evolve the word progressive to mean the fruition of these values in occupy and other via bitcoin, human rights, social justice, etc. I know a lot of folks agree with you, and we’ll see lol. But I still like using it and hope people can see my views as amplifying and evolving this state-centric view of progressive as we currently know it.
🤙 100% friend, keep it up were all in this together even if we differ around the margins.
Calle's take when he was on WBD was 🎯
Yes love that ep! And I think that was my first intro to cashu too 😃 @calle 👁️⚡👁️
Have you read or come across Brian Gitt’s work? I just came across some on Friday, super enthused about how he described the transformation of his mind and mission from the last 2 decades https://briangitt.com/articles/
You've swallowed the orange pill. You will never be able to unsee how ridiculous many progressive ideas are. Your transition has begun.
Hayek’s ideas about limits of knowledge and spontaneous order were very powerful to me. I learned about them from the Econtalk podcast with Russ Roberts. Later on I heard some interviews of those you mention, so speaking from experience, yes. You’re right on.