Bitcoin Forum

Am I the only one who finds this quote extremely annoying? It gives everyone an excuse to say that they are winning. Even if you sit around doing nothing, you can say that you're on the track to becoming President because everyone is "ignoring you".

Furthermore, it is a simple statement without any proof or real argument. Why is this progression of events likely? Why does having people ignore you, laugh at you, or fight you move you toward winning?

I cringe every time someone just quotes this and says, "Look, we're in stage x! Not long now before we win!". It's a totally pointless thing to say and an excuse to ignore real problems.

Quotes are just like statistics. You can pretend almost any of them fit your situation whether or not they do, and readers think you're "educated" and obviously smart, and of course too many of them are just morons anyway, and fall for it.

Of course, if you really want to make the point, just do a global search and replace on the whole forum, replacing that quote with "I feel like chicken tonight." It probably won't even materially affect any of the conversations around the quote. :)

Hope this clears everything up.

I don't find it "extremely annoying".  But it does describe a nonviolent protest of the masses against a tiny ruling class much better than it does  anything related to bitcoin.  I guess people are saying it b.c they think bitcoin adoption rate will someday soar and bitcoin users will outnumber the bankers, tax collectors, legislators, judges, etc. looking to oppress them.

They are comparing Bitcoin to non-violent protest, Ghandi is describing how people react to non-violent protest.
Bitcoiners think Bitcoin is non-violent protest of federal currency.

I'm sure the feds see it as criminal protest of the tax code, though.  >:(

So? You need to show that the quote is relevant in this situation for it to have any meaning.

Peter would have so fallen for mybitcoin.com. :)

What the Internet has done to my gears:
https://i.imgur.com/twAkr.jpg

You seem upset
http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j405/BowedYapper/epic_trollface.png

They are winning if you get emotional...

I think it's about trolling, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

First they ignore the troll, then they find him funny, but when they fight him (get trolled by him), he wins.

This quote applies to paradigm shifts pretty well.
First people ignore the new paradigm (don't talk to Galileo, people say he is an heretic).
Then they ridicule the paradigm because they fail to understand it. (lol! the earth is round ;D).
But at some point they start to understand this is real, they take fear and try to destroy it but its already too late.

Winning is not a stage, it was the underlying truth from the beginning.
And this truth arises slowly.

Blockchain based cryptocurrencies already won.
They ARE going to take over a huge part of the economy whether in current form or in another.
There is nothing anyone can do to stop that.
So it is just a question of how long people will take to adjust and understand that the world has changed irreversibly since the genesis block was minted.

When did the paradigm shifted first time? Ancient Greeks knew almost 2000 years before Galileo that Earth is round and also calculated the diameter. btw in no way I attempted to derail or hijack the discussion, just out of curiosity and lack of knowledge would like to know, why we forgot that in the first place

Couldn't agree more.

Also, it astounds me that people will use Ghandi's non-violent protest as an argument against any other kind of protest.

How many people starved to death in China under Mao?

First they've never heard of you, then they find out and start laughing, then when you stop being entertaining they poke you a bit, then you let something compromising slip and they take it as a cue to dredge up your sordid past while still laughing, then they win.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/misconceptions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

ok, 230 BC, now what?

Theymos, I think your analysis is an oversimplification.

The quote is grounded in context, and religious context especially plays a large role here.  Keep in mind that the interdependence of all people/events is emphasized far more in the east than in the west.  Karma is also emphasized (karma does not simply mean 'what goes around comes around' but is more directly related to cause-and-effect).  According to this belief, when a person get's angry, they lose because anger is suffering (how can a person be angry/vengeful if they are happy?)  In fact, ANY desire (the desire to attack, the desire to retaliate, etc.) is considered suffering because desire implies a lack of content in the present moment;  if you want something other than what 'is,' are you not dissatisfied?

In line with interdependence, if you do not retaliate against your attacker, you are adding positivity to the cumulative system....so, the attacker = negative contribution and the lack of retaliation = positive contribution.  If you retaliate, then you have attacker = negative contribution and retaliation = negative contribution.  According to this view, retaliation hurts not only your attacker, but you as well.  If  you don't retaliate, you win cumulatively since your individual identity is determined by a larger systemic identity (in Hinduism, this is the relationship between the atman and Brahman where the Atman is the individual manifestation of the universal Brahman). 

Then, there's the reincarnation argument which is entirely plausible.  If negative causes have negative effects, and if positive causes have positive effects, then it is possible that your 'positive' decision not to retaliate against an attacker (even if it means your own death now) may be better for you in the long-run.

These are just a few things to think about.  Keep in mind, what I stated is an oversimplification of the quote-in-context as well, and I barely even scratched the surface of the implications of the quote as applied to the context for which it was likely intended.

You have not donated any money to me.

If you have no emotions or desires then you go around full of apathy.

So if that is bad thing for you, why exactly is it a bad thing for someone else?

No offence, but I have no idea what you are talking about. What situation? Your original post was about the quote angering you; you didn't even mention a situation.

Any situation. As I mentioned, people usually just write the quote and then imply that they're bound to win because it's possible to place themselves somewhere within the sequence. You need to prove it.

It would be valid to use the quote and then explicitly draw parallels between your situation and Gandhi's situation. But I've never seen anyone do this, and I wouldn't do it because the quote is still a cliché.

I guess that is annoying but I thought you were talking about bitcoin. I really have never once heard anyone use that quote so I can't really give any input without a specific situation.

I've seen it a few times on this forum, though I posted this topic after reading it used (in the simplest, most stupid form) in a highly-rated comment on Reddit's Libertarian section.

Actually, quite the opposite.

Desire = discontent.  You are unsatisfied with the present moment.  This leads to selfishness since you want to fulfill your desires.
No desire = contentment.  You are totally satisfied with the present moment.  This leads to selflessness since you have no desires to fulfill.

Edit:  Also, no desire is not the same as no emotion.

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they get pissed that you cite Gandhi quotes,
then they freak out,
then you win

hmm that page doesn't allow editing, even while logged in.

and unfortunately one of the contributors has a misconception that precision = accuracy

Which is simply impossible. You can never know in advance who is going to win. Let alone prove it.

The Gandhi quote refers to one instance. Just as many ideas in history were simply ignored and never got anywhere. Or popped up again hundreds of years later, far after the first person to come up with the idea died.

Anyway, too many people think their computer screen is a crystal ball, these days... or at least many of the internet "predictions" are simply meant to discourage people from pursuing their ideals or ideas.

I'm currently at the 'people laugh at you' stage.
I just need to drink a few more beers and I'm ready for stage 3.

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they get pissed that you cite Gandhi quotes,
then they freak out,
then you win
unless somebody starts a forum thread
then it's 360 all over again

On a side note, I dug up a little something about Theymos before he changed his name:

http://www.weirdthings.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/1925_ford_moidel_t_thermos_truck.JPG

(hope you enjoyed the humor, theymos)

I just looked into this as it relates to bitcoin (https://bitedge.com/blog/then-they-fight-you-how-the-financial-system-is-attacking-bitcoin/) and Gandhi probably never said it

"A close variant of the quotation first appears in a 1918 US trade union address by Nicholas Klein:
And, my friends, in this story you have a history of this entire movement. First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you. And that, is what is going to happen to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America."

But still it has been true for bitcoin in the first 3 out of 4 steps which I detail in this post (http://www.bitedge.co/blog/then-they-fight-you-how-the-financial-system-is-attacking-bitcoin/) where "they" is the legacy financial system.

The "and then you win" part is not clear cut, to a large extent bitcoin has already won and it does not have to be binary win or lose given bitcoin is succeeding alongside the legacy financial system.

Meta: yes I know this is a 4 year old post, that is what I like most about it!

I think it means those who win or are successful in life have faced criticism in some part of their life. So when someone laughs at you or fights against you for a cause you believe in, that shouldn't discourage you. Move on.

For me, that is a pretty decent motivational quote. ;)

Edit: Not sure it is Gandhi's quote after reading the above post. I don't think I have noted that particular quote anywhere before. Anyway, I still think it is a good one. ;D