FYI: Bitcoin is a libertarian movement

[Namiks]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

[MisterPrada]

How very Rousseau. A nice thought, but I'm not convinced people are inherently good, nor that a truly privately run society is either possible or sensible.

[QuestionAuthority]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

I’d agree with you except Bitcoin is not decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s not open to everyone because it requires the internet and training to use, and the continuous fud created around bitcoin is a type of censorship.

[Namiks]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

I’d agree with you except Bitcoin is not decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s not open to everyone because it requires the internet and training to use, and the continuous fud created around bitcoin is a type of censorship.

I guess it depends on what you'd consider full decentralisation or anonymity.

The anonymity isn't entirely there, I agree. But the decentralisation is pretty spot-on in terms of providing a platform in which it's entirely peer-to-peer.

[QuestionAuthority]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

I’d agree with you except Bitcoin is not decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s not open to everyone because it requires the internet and training to use, and the continuous fud created around bitcoin is a type of censorship.

I guess it depends on what you'd consider full decentralisation or anonymity.

The anonymity isn't entirely there, I agree. But the decentralisation is pretty spot-on in terms of providing a platform in which it's entirely peer-to-peer.

I guess that depends what you consider decentralized. I don’t consider 90% of the mining force (bitcoins security system) being in the hands of a few people that meet and discuss the future of bitcoin “decentralization”.

As far as anonymity, ask the founder of Silk Road what he thinks about that (I’m not sure he can get letters in prison though).

[Namiks]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

I’d agree with you except Bitcoin is not decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s not open to everyone because it requires the internet and training to use, and the continuous fud created around bitcoin is a type of censorship.

I guess it depends on what you'd consider full decentralisation or anonymity.

The anonymity isn't entirely there, I agree. But the decentralisation is pretty spot-on in terms of providing a platform in which it's entirely peer-to-peer.

I guess that depends what you consider decentralized. I don’t consider 90% of the mining force (bitcoins security system) being in the hands of a few people that meet and discuss the future of bitcoin “decentralization”.

As far as anonymity, ask the founder of Silk Road what he thinks about that (I’m not sure he can get letters in prison though).

I agree that the centralisation of mining is a problem.

As for Silk Road: Ross wasn't caught as a result of his bitcoin transactions, it was mostly his stupidity in using a library's internet connection to sign into private services he used and owned in connection to Silk Road.

[jerrysmith]

Agreed 
Its an open market as per I know. Where people can work with freedom.
But without proper knowledge no one can get a good result. There are many reason a man will face lots of problem.
So I think before work in this platform everyone should have the minimum knowledge about Bitcoin 

[likeBTC]

But when are all those kind of people stop talking crap about bitcoin? You are talking about libertarians, but you are not taking in consideration that most people from governments or high ranked people from banks or whatever are trying to do exactly the same.

[greyday]

It also depends on what you consider liberal; the Libertarians I know are basically just anti-federalist Republicans...

[centralbanksequalsbombs]

Great discussion here.

First, educate yourself and then others.

Bitcoin is a secure, decentralized, trustless and open system which cannot be banned nor controlled.
 
Bitcoin has become the ultimate store of value and its popularity has strengthened over time and maximizes value compared to any other altcoin...why?:
If it can be shutdown, and have assets frozen by a bank or government, there would be no value
If it wasn't secure, there would be no value.
If it wasn't immutable, there would be no value.
If it wasn't globally distributed, there would be no value.
If it wasn't so strong, open-source decentralized and unstoppable, there would be no value.
If it wasn't so scarce, there would be no value.
If it was easy to spam transactions, there would be no value
If it required a central 3rd party to function, there would be no value
If it was stopped after all major banks on Earth banned in 2013 to today, there would be no value. (say "bitcoin" when transacting and watch the block of the transaction. simple fix=never mention "bitcoin").
If it didn't have the history of 8+ years (and still no hacker can exploit bitcoin blockchain), there would be no value
If it was exactly like fiat and only did transactions, there would be no value.

Bitcoin's value is worth hundreds of billions USD today. Altcoins however generally are scams, weak, pyramid schemes not offering these values.

Bitcoin has all the characteristics needed combined to hold the most value and increasing more than any other financial-asset option coming from the manipulated fiat central-banking debt-system. (more than stocks, more than houses, more than gold)


OPEN AND FREE TRADE IS POPULAR AMONGST ALL THE WORLD'S PEOPLES:
Here are weekly peer-to-peer localbitcoins cash trade data for two random countries as time goes on. Right-most area is the most recent past week.

[kingofpersia]

People's movement.

[pixie85]

It also depends on what you consider liberal; the Libertarians I know are basically just anti-federalist Republicans...

Liberals and libertarians are very different but the term has lost a lot of its meaning along the way. Anti federalism is a large part of it, but many people who call themselves libertarians but are left wing liberals.

[QuestionAuthority]

I've noticed quite a lot of 'non-liberals' talking about Bitcoin as if liberals should not exist within the crypto space. As if the nature of them goes against liberal beliefs.

A lot of people are now new to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so I felt it was a good idea to remind people that Bitcoin itself--in its earliest days--was a spark of libertarian beliefs due to the decentralisation, censorship resistance, and anonymity it provided. Bitcoin, and many altcoins, are a liberal creation. If you did not yet know that, it's probably best to read up on them a bit more before diving in.

Of course the idea of Bitcoin and its features is that they're open to all to use, regardless of which side you lean on politically and religiously; that's what makes it special.

If that alone isn't libertarian, I don't know what is.

I’d agree with you except Bitcoin is not decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s not open to everyone because it requires the internet and training to use, and the continuous fud created around bitcoin is a type of censorship.

I guess it depends on what you'd consider full decentralisation or anonymity.

The anonymity isn't entirely there, I agree. But the decentralisation is pretty spot-on in terms of providing a platform in which it's entirely peer-to-peer.

I guess that depends what you consider decentralized. I don’t consider 90% of the mining force (bitcoins security system) being in the hands of a few people that meet and discuss the future of bitcoin “decentralization”.

As far as anonymity, ask the founder of Silk Road what he thinks about that (I’m not sure he can get letters in prison though).

I agree that the centralisation of mining is a problem.

As for Silk Road: Ross wasn't caught as a result of his bitcoin transactions, it was mostly his stupidity in using a library's internet connection to sign into private services he used and owned in connection to Silk Road.

Think again:

“Researchers at the University of Luxembourg have highlighted methods to de-anonymize Bitcoin transactions. Bitcoin pseudonymity can be broken in a number of ways, from tracking payments to monitoring IP address nodes. And while tumblers and programs like Dark Wallet help, there is no bulletproof solution that makes Bitcoin impenetrable.”

https://gizmodo.com/a-friendly-reminder-bitcoin-is-not-anonymous-1682885318

[Riddikulo]

How very Rousseau. A nice thought, but I'm not convinced people are inherently good, nor that a truly privately run society is either possible or sensible.

The sense of cryptocurrencies is libertarian in itself, really. Using of Bitcoin open the possibilities that nobody could even imagine earlier. And this is in our society. Freedom of transactions, savings, earnings.