Bitcoin Forum

I have noticed that many Bitcoin users are quite liberal, and wonder the reason behind that. Conservatives believe in small government, limited tax, less regulations and free markets. Liberal policies would without a doubt hinder Bitcoin growth with intense government regulations and scrutiny.

I'm not that familiar with American politics, but I would also think that a fair number of people here might be conservative, but also libertarian as well?

Am I right to say that libertarians are also conservative? Just looking at Gary Johnson as an example...

I know people of all ideologies that are pro bitcoin and own some bitcoin (of course not in real life only online people since I have never seen anyone in real life that knows what bitcoin is) but I have noticed that a lot of people on bitcoin are libertarians and usually don't like the state interventionism policies.

Maybe I'm wrong there, but doesn't liberal mean the liberty of people from governmental restrictions?
So I would somehow see it just the other way round, that conservatives would hinder bitcoin growth, because it's the nature of conservativism to keep things like they are.
In case of money that would be fiat money.

What I see in America is that conservatives believe in nothing. They just elected a megalomaniac New York billionaire who is loyal to Russia. What country is this anymore?

I don't think that all conservatives are behind Trump. Like I said in my previous post, there must also be some that just believe in personal freedom (libertarian).

Anyway, I don't think that someone who is conservative isn't automatically a bad person or stupid, same with liberals. Although some people from either side would have you believe that.

Its actually difficult to think that only conservative people like Bitcoin and liberal don't. Bitcoin is a particular currency that is accepted by one and all. Every one loves Bitcoin and they leave thier politics behind it. That's my personal feel, however this question is one that deserves a lengthy debate

It's a fair question, but you shouldn't necessarily assume liberals want more regulation just for the sake of having regulations and scrutiny, or that it should apply universally.  I believe slashing regulation in traditional finance is a bad idea because banksters, brokers and hedge fund managers can't be trusted not to manipulate markets, cut corners, fudge figures and cook the books.  There needs to be oversight to attempt to keep them at least somewhat honest, and government regulation is the closest thing we have to that effect.  However, I don't believe Bitcoin itself should be regulated, because crooked individuals can't abuse crypto in the same way they can abuse fiat.  The rules are set in code and (for the most part) can't be flouted.  So it's unnecessary to regulate something which is effectively self-regulating.  Further scrutiny is not required because the system is open and transparent; everyone can already see exactly what is happening.  There's no need for government to be involved.  Businesses that utilise Bitcoin, however, can and should be regulated if they handle customers' funds.

It's entirely possible to be liberal and appreciate Bitcoin for what it is.

Yeah, I am extremely conservative and did consider myself a republican, but no longer. My party left me when they elected Trump because he's been a life-long liberal and is basically moderate now. However, I do feel Pence and his advisors will balance out the ticket slightly. I will cheer when he does something good, but will be extremely critical when he does bad things.

RodeoX, like you just illustrated: Trump has seriously damaged the conservative moment, he doesn't represent many of our values. But on another note, the Democratic Party is definitely in shambles as well.

That's the thing. I do not really consider myself conservative, but I have respect for those who have a consistent philosophy on the subject, right or left. But Trump is just about Trump and seems to have no center or consistent ideas about the world. He just reacts in the moment based on his feelings at that moment. That is how dictatorships operate. These are worrying times. 
P.S. I often voted Dem in the past. My party has also sold out and I'm outta there. 

Liberals and Conservatives have the same opinion about economy, they fight for the same purpose against the lefters fools. But, their opinion about society, comportament, religion is different. I heared that liberals are just lefters that studied a bit more.  :D

In the Bitcoin world it's possible to find many liberals and many conservatives also and even some hypocrite lefters wanting advantages on this capitalist world. There are all kinds of people using Bitcoins and following crypto-currencies.

Bitcoin was created as a reaction to how the current financial system failed the people and
continued to fail by allowing the bailouts throughout the world and prevented a correction.
Currently, there has been no correction and the markets are mostly pumping world wide
the same way a new shitcoin pumps. Satoshi created this system as a counter check to those
policies. He disagreed with that system's choice, so he created a new choice, Bitcoin.

So the question now is whether you believe bailouts/currency manipulation can be good or not.

Liberal or Conservative doesn't matter.
When a government pushes systems that allow people to live outside their means, and that system
obviously collapses due to being a legalized ponzi, should they defer that debt to future generations?

Satoshi thought no, so if you think the decision to do so was appropriate, you are likely here just
for the speculation and greed or for reasons that Satoshi never originally cared about or intended.

Absolutely, I am a Rubio and Reagan conservative all the way, and completely respect real democrats that aren't leftist snowflakes that want to abolish the electoral college and declare war on police. Next election, conservatives and real democrats will likely have to run 3rd party like Evan McMullin.


Nope, it's reversed. Conservative policy is more for individual freedom, limited government and free trade as well as the interpretation of the constitution in the original form. Whereas democrats feel the constitution is something that needs to be updated to the current times (while the party's leadership is on average 30 years older than Republican leadership)

Yup the government has hinder the growth of Bitcoin, and I don't blame them for doing such thing. I mean what country's government would allow a foreign currency to even be their 2nd official currency it is not right and will make things unbalance. Unbalance such us people will hoard Bitcoin to raise their value before dumping all of them. Also now only resident citizens will benefit having a 2nd currency but also foreigners will be allowed to control a country's wealth.

It's prety natural that Bitcoin users are liberal. People with liberal attitude to the world are wide open to new things including new technologies, changes and alternatives. So they were more keen to adopt Bitcoin too. Conservatives are different and they are usualy reserved to stuff like this. This both is worth for politics and everyday life and not just in America.

I do not believe that is true at all, to Bitcoin specifically.

The average age of House Republican leadership is 47.
The average age of House Democratic leadership is 76. (old enough to vote for JFK)

Tell me again who is the party of new technologies and innovation?

Sorry but that is very not true.
Conservatives are against regulation of businesses and government, but they love to regulate people's personal lives.
Such as who you can marry, or what bathroom you can use, or what drugs you can injest etc.

it's just simply a wrong generalization from you. Firstly if you generalize anything you are reducing the accuracy of the statement. Now to get into meat and potatoes, most people do not care about liberals/conservative when it comes to bitcoin, they only care about gambling. Last time I checked both liberals and conservatives liked to gamble. But, if we are talking about those who dont gamble, then it  still does not matter. Conservatives and Liberals both can enjoy bitcoin without their political stance get in the way.

Gambling, good point.
Again in the US it's the Conservatives that want to ban it. This is not the party of personal freedom.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/GOP-senators-revive-plans/2016/09/28/id/750546/

Why do people always to tag and label everyone, you are who you are and you believe in what you believe  ???  To suggest that most bitcoiners are liberal without anyway of even knowing that is just ridiculous,  keep your labels to yourself.

conservatives believe in corporate freedom
libertarians believe in personal freedom.

conservatives believe in people paying tax to hand to the corporations
libertarians believe in corporations paying tax to hand to the people

conservatives believe in people being restricted in what they can do unless they pay a corporation a fee
libertarians believe in corporations being restricted in what they can do unless they pay a fee


though i said all that above.
the 'branding' of political terminology is loose. its a scale because not everyone is a robot that fits perfectly into a descriptor.
so dont knitpick if you dont quite fit either.. and actually be happy that your free to be in the middle or outside.

the downside of this grey area/scaling.. is that one liberal can pledge one thing. but later mean another because its such a loose definition

I personally believe government should have its hands away from marriage, mostly because they do not do anything right. I could care less who you marry. However, now that they have their hands in gay marriage legislation, now we have people being forced to photograph or bake cakes for weddings, even if it is against their religion. We have a 1st amendment last time I checked.

On bathrooms, for the safety of other women it is believed not be proper for a man with every cell in their body with an X and Y chromosome (besides some sperm cells) to use the same bathroom. These are scientific facts, it's concerning that society is normalizing mental disorder. There had been countless instances of men raping women and claiming to be transgender and that is an extreme issue.

I am a political science major and have been extremely active in the Politics and Society forum for a while, it's not hard to determine. I'm just stating what I have observed. I could really care less what side of the political spectrum you're on, I'm just genuinely interested. The free exchange of ideas doesn't only apply when it agrees with you, you will never see me trying to silence someone's voice. If you do not agree with someone, encourage more speech to understand the opposing position, not less speech.

Religious superstition is not a very good reason to discriminate against a member of the public.
I do not see why religious belief should desire any special status over moral or intellectual belief.

If you allow such discrimination then you'll have work places refusing to hire people because of their skin colour.
That is a fact that we have seen in the past.

That is extreme BS more likely.
Why are there so many unisex bathrooms in the EU and they don't seem to have this imaginary problem?

Additionally, chromomes are not always so clear.

The political views are smoothed in front of the mutual interest. The same also applies with the religion. People put aside political views and religious differences when they transact each other and their only goal is the profit. So when money "speaks" people forget their political religious and social perspectives.

Let's not mix liberals with libertarians here. I consider myself a libertarian, but by no means a social liberal. Social liberals are responsible for the immigration problem in Europe. They think we should open our borders and allow people to live wherever they want, share everything with the newcomers and welcome them with open arms. That's what they did in Sweden, France, Germany and many more. They are childish people thinking that we are all equal and will live together in peace singing kumbaya.

Hmm, I didn't know about this difference. Looks a conscious vision about immigration... I think nothing too extremist is good. Some people are liberal, but looks more like anarchists, communists than any other thing. They must defend any kind of behavioral liberalism, even it brings the end of world stability, and that is in fashion these days, media loves this. About economy questions I'm fine with the liberal vision, but about society I prefer to stay at conservative side.

^
there we have my second point in a nut shell.. even within the liberal 'camp' theres a grey area.

same for the conservative camp..

thus the terms are too loose because
not all liberals want to be liberals. and instead want to be an offshoot of liberal
not all tories want to be tories. and instead want to be an offshoot of tories

the terms lack real definition and lack direction. thus become meaningless in the real world of diversity

You betray personal liberty at the altar of the State.

Ayn Rand, known as one of the most effective and influential exponents of free market capitalism and individual freedom, viewed open borders and free immigration as obvious.

http://openborders.info/self-ownership-versus-state-ownership/

if you want to be free to travel without being accosted by state troopers demanding your property if its over $10k.. then expect someone else to have the same freedom too

open borders or closed borders is not a liberal vs libertarian debate.. its a racism debate, picking and choosing who should have liberal freedoms is not a freedom.

i laugh when americans think they deserve the right to travel to any country and do as they please, but then dont recipricate.. thats racial hypocrisy not liberal/libertarian/conservatism

EG USA
americans want to go to cuba, tijuana, brazil whenver they like.. but the opposite. they cry out invasion

EG UK
dont let muslims on the euro tunnel to the uk. but as soon as france stops the brits from getting on the euro tunnel to go watch a Euro football game or go on a spanish holiday/club18-30.. there would be uproar

EG UK
we want to go to india for a year. but we dont want indians to come here for a year

Sure, it all started with strong libertarians wanting to make a change. Do you still remember what happened back in 2009, when the Banks nearly caused a global economic collapse? This was avoided with the help of the governments. They used our tax money to bail out the banks, so we had to pay for the greedy bankers mistakes. So this technology was developed to provide a alternative to the banking industry to prevent this in future.

If this is what a libertarian has to do to protect his wealth against banks and governments, then I would support this technology. Now, things are starting to change, because banks and governments are working together again to develop technologies <digital currencies> to remove cash from the system, and to replace it with something that would give them even more power. < Danish e-krone >

How did you make a conclusion that most of the btc users are liberal?

Maybe the majority of forum members here are liberals,but most of the btc users believe in the less

government and central bank control over our lives.

You hit the jackpot bro. Well determining who are conservative and who are liberals is kinda difficult to know. We don have the technology and mechanisms to capture the actual statistical data of  both parties. But there is one thing I know and we all cannot deny it and that is all bitcoin users want to profit from bitcoin whether he is conservative or liberal.
Do you agree with me?

Bitcoin is something revolutionary and helping people to become equal at least in the possibilities to earn money and all that stuff. It is ideologically the closest to left ideas, I guess. Conservatists are right, as we know. So, they can't really be for major changes in life and the impossibility to control btc now by the governments can be seen as anarchy.

Libertarians are supposed to be supporters of personal freedom, so how do you square that with not supporting the freedom of people to live and work where they want?  Why do open market principles suddenly not apply when it comes to the labour force?  You should merely consider yourself greedy and a bit of a hypocrite if you believe that you should have all the personal freedoms you desire, but no one else should.  You can't even make the argument that you should be able to protect what you've earned, since you didn't "earn" being born within a certain set of borders. 

What Bitcoin offers is more than political believe of individuals. It is control and freedom of your finances, nobody can give or guarantee this

We are not only supposed to be Libertarians, but also a bunch of drug lords and paedophiles and pornographers, because the media has to

paint people into boxes to define something that are not the norm. This has happened before, with the birth of the internet and just look what

happened with most of those early pioneers. { Was Bill Gates / Chris Hughes / Mark Zuckerberg / Paul Allen any of these labels, when they

created companies like Facebook and Microsoft? } 

First of all I'm not against the existence of State and I'm not an anarchist. We need some laws, especially the ones that allow us to protect our property, but these laws should concern only the essentials. To give you an example, we don't need the government to tell us what to do in our own homes, to check how much money we have in our accounts, make us ask if we can build a house on our own land and pay for permits on every step. That said, I don't consider all people equal as I've seen that some of them simply can't coexist in a society. The laws are nothing to them and the only law they obey is the law of the jungle. A woman is unfaithful to her husband? Death! A man doesn't believe in Allah? Death! A woman tries to leave her husband, who beats her? He cuts her nose off!
I've seen what migrants are doing in Europe. Last year in Germany there was a young girl, who just got a degree and went to work in social services. In her first year of work she got attacked and killed by a migrant, during an interview. The same year a policewoman in Berlin was attacked by a migrant with a knife. Just watch some clips, like that viral one where a migrant tells a funny (at least to him) story of how they abducted a young girl, a virgin, and then raped her in the housing complex the government has provided for them. If that happened to my daughter I'd have gone there and butchered them like the animals they are. Or read some articles about the attacks during New Year's Eve: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3773014/At-four-women-sexually-assaulted-immigrant-men-rampage-party-Germany-chilling-echo-New-Year-s-Eve-attacks.html

Maybe you, and I'm talking to the social liberals here, who think you can live alongside those people, should pay a visit to Sweden or Southern France? Maybe spending a day in a refugee housing area would give you a perspective.