Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin is a form of anarchy in the economic system. The Bitcoin system is designed to do self-rule and be supported by the application of technological advancements so that it looks amazing for mathematicians and technologists. However, according to the anarchism that has been successfully implemented in Spain, everyone must do the task according to their respective roles so that this concept can succeed.

Expecting Bitcoin to be successful is the same as expecting an anarchist social order to be realized. It seems impossible, but in fact, the social order of anarchy can be done with satisfactory results. The anarchic social order that occurred in the Spanish Revolution which lasted for more than two years before General Franco's invasion succeeded in conquering an area controlled by anarchists.

social anarchy which was also supported by economic anarchy in Spain was carried out extremely. One of them, the community supporting anarchism in Spain at that time burned government money. As a result, coupons (and even just trust) can be used to get fruit and vegetables. If you support Bitcoin to succeed only so that you can then get a lot of Dollars, you only pollute the brilliant concept of Bitcoin anarchy.

Its true, anarchy rejects the authority so bitcoin rejects the economic authority so we can use anarchy for bitcoin.my answer is no, bitcoin doesnt need a government support, its based on this.

Political anarchy can have many forms, there are dozens of school of anarchism like anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-communism, individualist anarchism, green anarchism and so on. They are all very different from each other, so we can't expect that Bitcoin is similar to them all. Additionally, Bitcoin is not a country, so it's not fully correct to compare it with political systems.
And Bitcoin is not purely egalitarian - developers hold more power than an average user, whales hold more power than an average user, miners hold more power than an average user. The strengths of users is in numbers, they create demand for Bitcoin and all other groups have to listen to them. If Bitcoin can be compared to anarchism, it's most closely resembles market anarchism.

Now there are more than one definition of Anarchy. What you have mentioned is one which doesn't really go with bitcoin whatsoever and look below for the second one,

"Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal"

This definition is partly true for bitcoin but not completely! Also I believe, government regulation is necessary for the growth of bitcoin! Without government support, mass adoption is not possible! But I literally find no similarities of bitcoin with anarchy so we are not polluting anything! We all have to live within a system and we want the system to adopt bitcoin! It makes no sense in going out of the system and adopt it!

Anarchy? I wouldn't completely say that bitcoin did cause or will cause anarchy in the economic system and I don't think that this is Satoshi's goal.

How can it cause anarchy when it wasn't yet adopted globally? It is deem as as store of value and investment instrument. We have gold as the top store of value and then a lot of assets out there that is also an investments and no one question them as anarchist or something.

Still they can question that bitcoin doesn't have central authority, can easily be manipulated because there is no regulation and such. But still, I don't think that it will cause chaos and anarchy in the financial world.

I dont think it's gonna work. Bitcoin is not private and not fast enough to change fiat money. Other crypto could, but they not popular.

I don't know if I really follow that comparison. I mean, with Bitcoin it's all about who has most mining power, at least when it comes to the people who generate their own Bitcoins. We're long past the days where anyone could just mine Bitcoins with their personal computer, now it requires vasts sums of capital.
You could say the same about trading, it's the people who have the most capital, who stand to make most out of Bitcoin.

So where exactly does anarchism come in? I can see that there could be one aspect of anarchism embedded into Bitcoin, so paying for goods and services with Bitcoin and with Bitcoin alone.
The thing is, most businesses convert their Bitcoin earnings instantly to fiat. I only know of a couple of companies that actually keep their Bitcoin revenue in Bitcoin. Even then it's not 100% of their revenue.

Isn't private because the blockchain is public information, but you can always use a mixer service ;) , and change it for fiat doesn't take more than 1 hour if you do it by the right way.


But getting back on topic, i don't think we should compare bitcoin with anarchy because is like more like a 3 divided power system: Miners, Coders and Users. Each one of them could take decisions if a good idea comes out. Is just my point of view.

These days the difficulty in mining has increased tremendously, but it needs some community to take it further without which the network gets collapsed. When we state bitcoin as anarchy it needs to be clear that there isn't any governing body which is completely against the ruling authorities.

To my understanding the decentralized state of the network is misinterpreted at times which too is a kind of manipulation of the market.

Bitcoin can exist with or without government support. Its money that is out of control from the State, it can be useful to anyone willing to use a money that can't be manipulated by the State, or any private institution.

If anarchists decide to use it, its their choice because they studied it and found it useful.

They can also give a try at making their own altcoin, hopefully not deviating too much from Bitcoin. Community money isn't new, but crypto is far more secure.

As for Spain, one reason Franco won was the irreconcilable division between communists and anarchists. Another would be Hitler's aid... Spain went back to being a monarchy ever since the fall of the republic, a bit before WWII.

Yes, anarchy does have many branches, one branch of the ideology of anarchism is a market free of anarchy (anarchy capitalist). Okay, I agree that bitcoin is included in anarchy capitalism.


I'm not saying that anarchy is chaos. What I mean is a socialist economic system without government. coordination and management, without the bureaucratic rules that are broadly defined as being superior in economic, political and administrative areas

Governments didn't support (and most still don't) Bitcoin for the longest time, and it's gotten to the point where even the President of the United States has tweeted about it. Adoption is happening and governments can't claim any credit.

Bitcoin doesn't need government support; in fact, the most ideal scenario for it is complete non-intervention from governments. Bitcoin is inherently anarcho-capitalistic, so the idea that it needs outside intervention is pretty misguided. Support could even be detrimental in some cases, considering the fact that it will surely come with some sort of compromise.

just because bitcoin is not the same system as we are use to that doesn't make it an "anarchy". for starters bitcoin is not a society to want a government and it is not defying the authority of the government. bitcoin is a currency or a payment system that has its own rules and laws and it is sticking to them. and lets not forget that it all started because the current payment systems were severely flawed and also corrupted and needed fixing.

Money itself is a form of anarchy too, we should go back to barter system, no dollar no currency no fiat no crypto, but people with higher IQ don’t want to do that, they want to be the only 0.1% of elites of the elites.

Bitcoin is the naughty child and the fox in the Hen house and Anarchists just love the disruptive impact that it has on the current financial system and also the uncontrollable nature of the technology. Governments only realized too late that Crypto currencies cannot be stopped and that they will have to adapt to a whole new way of thinking to try and regulate it.   ;D

Libra woke the Giant in the US and governments are now very focused on regulating Crypto currencies to protect their reserve currencies, because Crypto currencies can have a huge affect on the value of their local currencies.  :P

We still do not know what the launch of Libra will lead to, but I think it will be very interesting ;D

Maybe you're right cpz btc can't be fully regulated by govs

You may have a point, but anarchy is too strong a word to use, bitcoin isn't in any way trying to oppose government rules or system of payments all it does is provide a more comfortable and accessible means or method of payment, one that is decentralized and puts control in the hands of people.

Bitcoin can in no way be anarchical, as it doesn't intend to overthrow the government or it's system of payment

Unfortunately for most of the "left" world socialist economy means quite the opposite: Major state economic intervention, "command" central planned economy, absolute control (replacing the market with their own, whatever...) The opposite to what Bitcoin represents, which renders the State powerless in regards to money.

But yes, i can see anarchists liking it, others hating it, and some wanting to make their own variant. That's the point...

I live in a "socialist" country that denounces anarchism, while some urban-anarchists support it because "the right is worse"... And the result has been abysmal to the masses. None of the State officials are in need of anything, while most of the people are.

Cypherpunks are all anarchists, directly or not. Satoshi comes from this type of person.
No, Bitcoin doesn't need to be overloaded with regulations, basically, it doesn't need any. Look yourself, over the past decade, Bitcoin has been doing pretty well with almost no regulation.
Bitcoin was created to avoid these same regulations (and more), why accepting again to be controlled when a new currency supposed to be decentralized appears. Better to go back to fiats if we're still controlled by someone.

Bitcoin intends to do what you want it to do. If you want to work your way around governments and everything that's centralized, then Bitcoin is a fantastic tool allowing you to do so in the most convenient way.

Some people find Bitcoin more like a currency type of tool for payments, which is great too even though the on-chain transactions are quite an obstacle in that field. LN will be it then.

For the first time people can choose to do whatever it is they want with their finances. It's an incredible power that can't be stopped by anybody. Let people just use it the way they want and call it whatever they want. Freedom.

an anarchical system of government can be compared to a tyrant system whereby order and decisions are vested on a central power, but this is quite different for bitcoin as we have seen overtime the emergence of altcoin that coexist side by side with bitcoin. I dont really see bitcoin enjoying that dictatorial leverage.

I see where all this is coming from, but it carries a danger: factionalism. Those "branches/forms" of anarchism are arguably just the political divisions we already have today with new names.


My take is that it wouldn't be healthy for any one of these ideas to dominate, because any of them could have a role to play given the right circumstances. Real life is too complicated to assume that a single idea for organizing will work in every situation. How about using just one word describing the ideology of letting ideas prove themselves in real situations according to their observable efficacy: anarchy



anarchy is always presented to us in the media or in movies/tv as chaos. But it does not mean chaos; "self-rule" or "emergent order" are less politicized descriptions.

It will be quite difficult for bitcoin to attain the widespread adoption we so desire without regulations from governments of different countries. Where there is a ban you cannot fully have a functional bitcoin or blockchain activities.

Anarchy according to an online dictionary is:    

BITCOIN SYSTEM IS NOT AN ANARCHY.
Bitcoin a bit like human body... there is a set rule which every part of the body (including the head or brain) follows.
The head or brain can't go against the rules or stop serving some parts of the body it is in disagreements with....An ideal system should work this way.       If the brain stops playing its roles, the hand, mouth, stomach etc won't feed it nor will this parts function anymore and the whole body dies. No part of the body drags the rest backward. They are built on rules, more like  automated rules.

Interestingly,  the human body have nodes-like rules/blueprints which are distributed around the body. this blueprints are why our bodies were assembled correctly, function properly, regrow tissues, transport nutrients to the right places etc . The copies of the blueprints are distributed in every part of the body. All the trillions of cells in our body have a copy of the blueprint each or better still, the blueprints are exactly thesame in every cell... You won't be wrong to call a human body a Natural Blockchain with trillions of nodes.


If  human body doesn't qualify as Anarchy as defined by online dictionaries then blockchain is definitely not Anarchy. Blockchain is self-regulating like Human body.  It should work well without problems just like human body.

By the definitions they have given, I think it is. It denies government regulations. No more explanation for that. That's why Bitcoin is not adopted worldwide because it's against government regulations. I always expect hostility from government because they think they are losing control over their people. I admire those states that embraced it even though it threatens their power to regulate.

in the definition for anarchy you presented, nowhere did it mention "no rules". It stipulated "no rulers", which is different



not much of a qualification then? ???



"self regulating" is a more accurate description of what anarchy actually means

      There's a little similarity as the way we use bitcoin but it's have no capabilities of invading a government and replace the whole system though there's a possibility happen an assimilation of people , and what we can do is just to continue support bitcoin then wait for other people coming up here .

I don't think that it's 'anarchy' per se.

There are still rules within the bitcoin network that people abide by in order to facilitate transactions, as well as a hard coded emission mechanism with a hard cap on the amount of coins that can ever be mined and thus be in circulation.

These rules and regulations still exist, and essentially are where the intrinsic value of bitcoin is derived from.

In contrast to fiat currencies however, these decisions on the 'monetary policy' is not set and maintained by a central entity, but done so through consensus on a decentralized network, and enforced as such to eliminate the possibility of a rogue central entity. That's the major difference, I think.

"anarchy" does not mean "no rules"

I hope you read the article about crypto-anarchist and you think for yourself that bitcoin is an idea of crypto-anarchist

https://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/crypto-anarchy.html

I wouldn't describe it as a form of anarchy.
There are certain rules that need to be followed if you are into the cryptocurrency industry.
Anarchy means that everyone does what ever he wants without following rules. Bitcoin is an innovation that it better fits to be called as revolutionizing the economic system, meaning that it improves it, not creating chaos in it.

This seems to be highly improbable wherein people are interested more in government papers other than being free from the burdens that fiat currency and banks are placing upon their shoulders. Everyone do what the government and the banks say, and the society nowadays are trusting these entities highly on most occasions, with the exception, of course of graft and corruption wherein they 'feel' that 'their money' is being taken away from them. Had they known that in most simulations made by scientist, anarchy always remain supreme and always end up to be the form of societal structure when the governments fail to do their duty.


That was also a spectacle on how long it took before Franco realized his dream of ruling Spain and pushing the anarchist away. If it worked in (not-so) contemporary times, it could also work in our time as well, but the problem is that there would be massive bloodshed taking place before it happens. Bitcoin might be the start, although we are for the most part drifting away from the primary ethos of it every single day and let greed consume that belief.

Your position (I don't have any issue with this though) on this looks like what those in government would side with and this further distracts from the aim for which Bitcoin was made. Now, let's look at this: What really is money? Isn't it just any document by mutual understanding to be used as legal tender for the exchange of goods and services? Is Bitcoin achieving that? Of course, yes! So, why would anyone call it an anarchy?

Perhaps someone adheres to saying that anarchy is the mother of order, but for a cryptocurrency market, this wording is not appropriate at all.  In addition, I am sure that the cryptocurrency will not be the only currency in the world.

No it doesn't

Anarchy means that people agree rules between each other

To me Anarchy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy) is a State-less form of government, ie. direct. In the past it was considered impossible on a large scale (beyond a small community or town) but with current technologies it could be doable...

While unrelated to Anarchy, there is an order within chaos, see Chaos theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory). Which is why i don't like the misuse of both words :)

I'm curious to know why/how do you think today's technologies give the possibility to citizens to be part of an anarchist movement on 'a large scale'? Anarchism, Libertarian, whatever people call it, history showed we don't need technologies for this. Since this is a rather broad term, we could also consider the Amish as anarchists (they're great people btw). Don't need to have the same anarchist movement worldwide, different needs for different populations/histories/cultures...

Ok, how do you poll 100million people on an issue, or since they are the lawmakers, all the discussion involved? Now this can be done online in days.

Yes, it would have been technically possible to do it with snail mail in the span of months or years, but also prone to sabotage and fraud. Blockchain technology also happens to help secure it too...

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say: current technology helps facilitate a form of State-less government, where every citizen is the law maker and the decision maker, and provides justice. Unless you want to go down the slippery road of representatives, and rebuild a system with rulers and ruled again.

Of course, i'm also aware of some ideas involving AI, but i won't get in to that here. Just technology that facilitates (and secures) communication and decision making.

I agree totally. Using bitcoin to gain $$ just annoys me. It is a payment method and a way to use and own your own currency without government or banks intervention. Putting the power back in the people's hands and out of the authorities. We building something that has value based on how much we willing to trade on bitcoin. The idea is the same as when we use to use gold coins but now we minting our own coins. It really is not very hard to understand, I mean it is called bitcoin after all. You do mint physical coins and making a crypto is like minting your own coin and works in the same way. The only difference is we not forging out gold coins we are slowly releasing them on a lotto style distribution method where you gain a % of the released bitcoin based on your mining power / total mining power.


100%

I would give you a merit but you already legendary.  :P

Bitcoin is not an anarchy. You cannot say it because bitcoin is newly existing currency. And there is no kind of economic model nor social order can classify the cryptocurrency. We can`t say that it is only governed by same and few people because bitcoin can be governed or still under the control of the government. Why? Exchanges that run bitcoin and crypto trading are still regulated. And there are countries that still banning bitcoin. So, I don`t think that it is the best suit social order for bitcoin. Just sayin.

Those ideas are inherently contentious, anarcho-communism can't stand private property and they wouldn't stop until it's abolished worldwide - meanwhile private property is a cornerstone of many forms of individualist anarchism. Anarcho-primitivism seeks to destroy civilization which puts them in opposition to almost any other political movement. It's very hard for such radical ideas to peacefully coexist, they view each others way of life as injustice.

And using one word to describe them all will only create more confusion, it's literally like saying that there should be a state, without specifying what kind of state - it could be a monarchy, a democracy, a fascist dictatorship. Which is where we get back to OP's question - Bitcoin has similarities to some forms of anarchism, but not all.

Governments do not trust the blockchain platform. The most fundamental reason is that they cannot control it, I know that it is transparent but cannot control information from transaction addresses. In addition, concerns about money laundering and crime increase, resulting in regional security.

People who invite conflict in that sort of way would be likely to meet their demise rather quickly in a more anarchic world. But I don't really believe there are too many of them anyway, they'd soon catch onto that.

And as long as these people respect other's ways of handling resources, then they can do what they like with their own. You can't say "there's no rigid way of doing things", then say "except you've all got to do it this way". I wouldn't do that in my personal life, but if I was running or working for a company, it's inherently a collective as you're working as a team with pooled resources. Are we gonna start targeting businesses as communist cults because the ownership rights of company property is "too blurry"?

If you wanna fight socialists, or they wanna fight you, the best outcome is if you both kill each other IMO. Forget the ideological divisions, and simply leave each other be.

100% agree, it is better if we maintain our respective ideologies. with various ideologies spread around us, we cannot say that our understanding is the most correct.. "respect each other for a more peaceful life"

However, in order to use Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency, we all need the state’s national money. If there is no regular currency, it is unlikely that you can effectively replace them with a decentralized cryptocurrency. It only in theory seems that it is easy. I do not recognize any anarchy but practical life. For me, anarchy is equivalent to chaos. It seems to me that in order for any society to function effectively, a certain order is needed. Therefore, in our form of organization, bitcoin must be organizationally regulated.

no theory is necessary

the nation state is a relatively recent thing. before that, many people all over the world didn't live in a state (some wouldn't even know such a thing existed)

all these free people could or did use money, the archeological and historical records contain abundant proof



you do, sorry to have to break it to you. the reason you (and most people) don't rape, rob and murder is because of your natural morals, not because there's a punishment for doing those things



it means "without rulers" in Greek. You've been watching too many movies (where the word "anarchy" is always used wrongly to mean chaos)



right, but when we solve problems with our friends, neighbours, shopkeepers or family, but without the state's help, we're creating an ordered society. Without rulers.



well, there are no rulers in Bitcoin, but it is organized, and it is regulated, and it is ordered. You've proven yourself wrong rather simply :)

Nope

It needs rules and consensus about. Anarchy doesn't want rules at all

It needs an existing economy and rule based (minimal is ok) capitalism to allow maximum open competition between miners.

And P2P trade function, where traceable txs are done and need a legal basic framework to be embedded into


No. Anarchy is not good for any global monetary settlement system like Bitcoin

ok, let's call it "peer-to-peer trade" ???

or "peer-to-peer governance"

it's pretty obvious that rules or consensus can be achieved person-to-person, so you're wrong



Bitcoin already is a peer-to-peer system, with rules and without rulers. If you don't want to call that anarchy, that's fine, but you're a joke if you think it could possibly be used (or have users) if there were no rules.


Bitcoin has rules. You don't like them.
You don't have to use Bitcoin, no-one's asking you to do so (or asking you to stay here on Bitcointalk.org)

in short: if you don't like it, fuck off (I predict you continue to come back whinging about something forever, nice life you have there ;D)

No, I don't think BTC is actually an Anarchy, it lacks a lot of the crucial parts which makes anarchy what it is - which is a good thing because those versions of society are quite ruthless and restrictive to everyone.

There are some aspects that might make it seem like Anarchy, but it isn't the same thing - they are obviously rules in place when it comes to Bitcoin, and obviously so.

I like this sort of view on BTC, and anarchy. Maybe it could be seen as a variation of anarchy.

I read the whole topic and I can say the following. Bitcoin is 100% pure anarchy. People often do not understand what anarchy is and confuse it with chaos. People who confuse anarchy with chaos probably don’t understand the essence of bitcoin, and they should make more efforts to do this, starting with bitcoin's white paper (https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf). After that, it also good idea to improve your knowledge of anarchy, but this is optional. :)

The cognitive dissonance is that bitcoin is anarchy, but the bitcointalk forum has a complex hierarchy structure, administrators, global moderators, local moderators, many ranks for users, trust system lists, brr. You have to somehow live with this discomfort, if you want to be heard by your like-minded people. My anarchist nature is protesting, but I try to keep it on a short leash, because being heard is more important for me now.

Bitcoin is not anarchy in any of description, and It doesn't require you to be an anarchist to use it. It isn't any sort of these philosophy things much in the same way that gold isn't any of these things. Bitcoin came into existence and popularity because of its inherently anti-regulatory nature, this is not relative or subjective to contemporary anarchic proponents. It isn't the old lens that clarifies the financial liberty that bitcoin entails, but rather such liberty is the essence of Cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin was born to take the control of money supply out of the hands of governments, and whether that falls in line with one the steps towards anarchism or not, we should all keep that in mind, and not betray bitcoin's original mission. Somebody can want a strong government and also a permissionless and decentralized currency. It is not a contradiction to desire both.

Anarchy in this concept does not mean breaking the law. the concept of bitcoin is a revolution in money transactions
for people who want to be anonymous and not shackled by the banking system.
the presence of bitcoin has not only revolutionized how money transactions can be simplified and opens up opportunities
for people to develop cryptocurrency based projects/industries.

I totally agree with this, bitcoin can stand on its own and without no leaders or dictators or managers or a government behind it. Bitcoin is made to be decentralized so this must happen no one should ever take control of bitcoin no matter what.Anarchy is literally just a rebellion against the law or a tradition, people do want changes that's why they are supporting bitcoin change for good not for the worst.

If you dont like govs - fuck off - u voted / u are part of / u can change (little)  - but u cannot go mad as u are


bitcoin is just tech - it doesnt Change much  - don't get it ?

I want to, they won't allow it. Only choice is to go to another planet, and no doubt they'd follow everyone there and start ordering everyone about again



quit voting long ago



no I am not, I refuse to take part in something I never asked to be a part of, especially if it is thinly disguised bullying



that's not how this garbage system is marketed to the voters, but it's true: you can change something so small through the electoral system that it makes almost no difference, and gives the political class plenty of advanced warning about how to make counter-reactions that will erase any political gains the electorate can make



tech is a tool. tools can be powerful. powerful tools always, every time they were created and spread, changed the world.

Initially, it was a form of anarchy, but every year bitcoin becomes more and more subject to government and banking structures

...and also tech and changes got us finally away from living in caves and anarchy, if u want go back, BitCoin is not ur friend

Lol

OP, I like the idealism, but some of us have come here for the money, but stayed for the revolution. Understand the incentives, encourage the greed, then it will lock everyone in. 8)

Exactly, take myself as an example.. I entered Bitcoin because I was looking for a alternative payment option. I was a victim of credit card fraud and I lost a lot of money, so I was looking for a better online payment option.

I found Bitcoin, but the real benefit of Bitcoin became more evident, when I went down the Rabbit hole and realized that there was a huge movement behind this technology to disrupt corrupt Banking practices and to re-invent the whole payment system.  ;)

Every cent that are converted to Satoshis are a step closer to true disruption and also improvement of the old legacy/centralized  payment systems.  ;)

@WindFury @Kakmakr

same here

I originally thought "sounds like interesting tech, but obviously can't go far, maybe the banks do something like it?" How naive that was ;D

I don't think bitcoin is a form of anarchy, anarchy is incompatible with liberty and it's not about bitcoin. If I choose my own cryptocurrency and investing in something that is risky, it doesn't mean I am against government. We can't say bitcoin is anarchy just because it is another system.

There's also every watt of energy used to "mine" as a hedge/value transformation to research about. What most everyone is saying is "wasteful", might actually be the most revolutionary part of Bitcoin.

This is partly true, and by anarchy I mean something positive

Haha I really liked the Analogy even though there is no central anarchist in human form involved in this yet Bitcoin can prove to be pain the ass of the national economies around the world. It acts as an infection to traditional economic system in a way that it provides leakages from the supply of money and even helps in money laundering and greatly hampers the power of banks to create more credit. However expecting this anarchy to create a revolution and become the sole dictator of the world economy is something like an imagination or dream. Let's see how this revolution works out.