Let me just weigh in as an unabashed socialist if I may...
CAPITALISM IS NOT THE PROBLEM...CORRUPTION IS.
And Bitcoin is going to end corruption? Pipe dream.
That's why it's important to define the meaning of "corruption." No monetary system would ever change the basic compulsions within people - to lie, cheat, steal, deceive, etc. Corruption of human character will always exist. BUT, what doesn't need to exist, is the ability of that corruption in human character to leverage the coercive power of government toward its whims. When the government grants favors and special protections, the corruption of human character will inevitably pour into a corrupt governmental system.
The solution to "ending corruption" in this way, is to shrink the government as much as possible. To limit its power to grant favor. To restrain it from interfering with free men and women, from stealing, from war. Reduce the power of central governments, and the corruption of human character will be restrained - its harm limited to the immediate sphere surrounding corrupted individuals, instead of spread or socialized throughout the society.
Corruption is a bit vague... it's better defined as "corporatism," or the ability of government and corporations to coerce, steal, and manipulate.
Mussolini had a term for that. Fascism. And who better would know? I personally feel that we (in the US) are much farther down _that_ road than a lot of people imagine, and the road ahead has been paved at this time.
Fascism and corporatism are similar in many ways... perhaps fascism is just corporatism at a further stage. There is one long gradient path from free-market capitalism toward statism/fascism. We find socialism and corporatism along that path. The way one can determine how far along the path we are, is to observe the extent to which individual property rights are respected. When you surrender half your income to the government, individual property rights have long been abandoned, and nobody should be surprised when some of that stolen money ends up in the hands of those well-connected to government.
Bitcoin appeals to me because it could be forcible taken from everyone by a simple majority (with some padding) via a software update. This could provide the 'FEAR' necessary to keep abuse of the system to a tolerable level. In this way, even _I_ have some reservations about the 're-distributitative' nature of Bitcoin. The 'have-not's could rape the 'have's so fast and so hard their heads would spin, and for no particularly fair reason other than that they can. I'm surprised that it is so popular amongst some of you folks (but maybe that is because I don't really understand anachro-capitalism as well as I should...I read a bit about it the other day. It's kind of fascinating actually and does not seem to be exactly what I thought it was.)
Hmmm I think you may not quite be seeing it clearly. If there is a strong disagreement between Bitcoin holders, the block chains can fork, but one group cannot take the coins away from the other. So in a hypothetical world with two classes, a rich and a poor, the poor at worst could fork a chain if they all agreed to do so, and then both classes would operate their own version. It doesn't take a genius to guess which chain would be more respected and ultimately win out.
And America is very much a socialist country... that's the ironic part of these protests. They're protesting like we had capitalism to blame for this
The more that wealth and power accumulates to a small fraction of the population, the more some of you people carry on about 'socialism' and 're-distribution.' Handy for the small fraction of people with all the poker chips. Funny that. We don't even have universal health care for Christ's sake! Forgive me if I question some of you folks's powers of analysis and resistance to propaganda (but I'm not expecting that you will
) While everything is something of a gradation, I'd say that Sweden is socialist while he US is more fascist.
Wealth is not poker chips.
Those who see wealth as poker chips will inevitably be led toward socialist sympathies. Those who understand that wealth is produced, not distributed, will inevitably be led toward capitalist/libertarian sympathies.
And I'm curious... what is universal health care? All treatment has cost - so to what level of cost are all people entitled, in your view? Do we all have a right to ibuprofen? Or do we have a right to yearly checkups? Or to all drugs and perscriptions? Or do we have a right to infinite health resources? And if we have a right to a good or service, does that not mandate a slavish claim upon the life of another person? If I'm entitled to ibuprofen, who should be forcefully compelled to produce it for me?
Show Posts
