Has Bitcoin changed your political position

[renaxi]

Still hasn't decided what my political position is, but as far as i can say now, nothing in Denmark fits my needs, so im just gonna vote blank.

[1715325592]

1715325592

[1715325592]

1715325592

[1715325592]

1715325592

[ErisDiscordia]

i originally got into bitcoin when i was an agorist. it sort of went hand in hand with it. i have always considered myself a libertarian, although i now consider myself an anarchist and thus much further left now than when an agorist. so.... i suppose bitcoin has not changed my positions.....

I really wish people would stop thinking about politics in terms of the "left-right paradigm". It's so counterproductive.

[Carlton Banks]

i originally got into bitcoin when i was an agorist. it sort of went hand in hand with it. i have always considered myself a libertarian, although i now consider myself an anarchist and thus much further left now than when an agorist. so.... i suppose bitcoin has not changed my positions.....

I really wish people would stop thinking about politics in terms of the "left-right paradigm". It's so counterproductive.

Using the left-right axis is actually the most meaningful way of looking at political opinions. So-called "descriptive" positions, like liberal, capitalist, anarchist or communist just confuse things, they only provide a blank canvas onto which any useful politics can be projected by a conniving political manipulator.

[Walter Rothbard]

i originally got into bitcoin when i was an agorist. it sort of went hand in hand with it. i have always considered myself a libertarian, although i now consider myself an anarchist and thus much further left now than when an agorist. so.... i suppose bitcoin has not changed my positions.....

I really wish people would stop thinking about politics in terms of the "left-right paradigm". It's so counterproductive.

Using the left-right axis is actually the most meaningful way of looking at political opinions. So-called "descriptive" positions, like liberal, capitalist, anarchist or communist just confuse things, they only provide a blank canvas onto which any useful politics can be projected by a conniving political manipulator.

From my point of view as an anarchist, left and right (in America at least) seem to be particular sets or "baskets" of opinions.  Looking at it from the principles I follow, some of the right positions and some of the left positions seem internally inconsistent.  For example, the American right claims the principle of "small government," but then supports the largest government program of all (the warfare state.)

[Carlton Banks]

i originally got into bitcoin when i was an agorist. it sort of went hand in hand with it. i have always considered myself a libertarian, although i now consider myself an anarchist and thus much further left now than when an agorist. so.... i suppose bitcoin has not changed my positions.....

I really wish people would stop thinking about politics in terms of the "left-right paradigm". It's so counterproductive.

Using the left-right axis is actually the most meaningful way of looking at political opinions. So-called "descriptive" positions, like liberal, capitalist, anarchist or communist just confuse things, they only provide a blank canvas onto which any useful politics can be projected by a conniving political manipulator.

From my point of view as an anarchist, left and right (in America at least) seem to be particular sets or "baskets" of opinions.  Looking at it from the principles I follow, some of the right positions and some of the left positions seem internally inconsistent.  For example, the American right claims the principle of "small government," but then supports the largest government program of all (the warfare state.)

Walter, you're a good guy, but I'm being massively, massively sarcastic in that post (and all other posts in this thread). It should be pretty obvious that the exact opposite of what I said up there is the logical truth, but no-one seems to be catching on. Although you've got a much better idea than most, in fairness.



The left and the right isn't just a "failed paradigm", or "no longer adequate for the job", it's an outright distortion of the truth, it always was. And it's only any good at making people who really want Liberalism end up with Socialism, and people who want Libertarianism end up getting Crony-Capital Corporatism. I don't know why I'm saying this, it's maybe something to do with it being the actual truth.

Here it is again folks. The headshot. Take everything Left of center. Then everything on the Right. Flip them around. It. makes. no. fucking. difference. Hence, fake. Hence, clever psychological propagandism mechanism. All time, all round champion. Your news-media, history books, economics guides, school teachers, friendly neighbours, they all talk about and refer to this complete bullshit fictional scale as if it's something real. Blame the first three on that list, the rest were all idiots who mindlessly repeat things without ever thinking them through.

Mind control is not secret government radio waves targeted at you from black ops weather balloons. It's a subtly crafted, well thought out lie, widely told and widely believed. And it starts being told from the mouths of people who we should be able to trust the most.

[Walter Rothbard]

i originally got into bitcoin when i was an agorist. it sort of went hand in hand with it. i have always considered myself a libertarian, although i now consider myself an anarchist and thus much further left now than when an agorist. so.... i suppose bitcoin has not changed my positions.....

I really wish people would stop thinking about politics in terms of the "left-right paradigm". It's so counterproductive.

Using the left-right axis is actually the most meaningful way of looking at political opinions. So-called "descriptive" positions, like liberal, capitalist, anarchist or communist just confuse things, they only provide a blank canvas onto which any useful politics can be projected by a conniving political manipulator.

From my point of view as an anarchist, left and right (in America at least) seem to be particular sets or "baskets" of opinions.  Looking at it from the principles I follow, some of the right positions and some of the left positions seem internally inconsistent.  For example, the American right claims the principle of "small government," but then supports the largest government program of all (the warfare state.)

Walter, you're a good guy, but I'm being massively, massively sarcastic in that post (and all other posts in this thread). It should be pretty obvious that the exact opposite of what I said up there is the logical truth, but no-one seems to be catching on. Although you've got a much better idea than most, in fairness.

D'oh!  My sarcasm meter must have been completely off!  Thank you for clarifying.

I love your avatar and username, btw.  Always gets me singing "It's Not Unusual..."

[Carlton Banks]

D'oh!  My sarcasm meter must have been completely off!  Thank you for clarifying.

I love your avatar and username, btw.  Always gets me singing "It's Not Unusual..."

I've been trolling all the, shall we say less thoughtful, responses to this thread all along, starting with the OP. Your post does not come under that category though, I just got fed up with the charade and took the opportunity you gifted me.

[freedomno1]

The topic of the moment is
HAS THE US SENATE Discussion changed your political position 

[Mike Christ]

The topic of the moment is
HAS THE US SENATE Discussion changed your political position 

Oh, yes; I am now a staunch fascist and just about ready to conquer any nation which gets in our way

[beetcoin]

they're all sycophants.. so i'm assuming the congress members present at the meeting today have or will buy BTC.. or possibly they're being bought out by someone with lots of BTC.

so no, my opinion still remains.

[bonker]

More right leaning? left leaning?  For me its reaffirmed my libertarian stance.

What about you guys?

BTC and this forum pretty much showed me Libertatrians are a bunch of juvenile dreamers and goofed out trippers unable to respond  or react to criticism.

[hawkeye]

More right leaning? left leaning?  For me its reaffirmed my libertarian stance.

What about you guys?

BTC and this forum pretty much showed me Libertatrians are a bunch of juvenile dreamers and goofed out trippers unable to respond  or react to criticism.

I'm sure the abolitionists in the 19th century were told the same kinds of things. 

[bitlancr]

I first got involved with Bitcoin as a minarchist. Since then I've become a full-on libertarian - not through Bitcoin per-se, but through reading this forum and plenty of Rothbard.

It's clear to me now that libertarianism is the only morally-consistent position.

[ErisDiscordia]

What's the difference between a minarchist and an anarchist?

About 6 months. 

[Walter Rothbard]

I first got involved with Bitcoin as a minarchist. Since then I've become a full-on libertarian - not through Bitcoin per-se, but through reading this forum and plenty of Rothbard.

It's clear to me now that libertarianism is the only morally-consistent position.

That warms my heart, friend.  I hope many, many more come to the same conclusions through the things that are going on through this currency and the community that surrounds it.

[Carlton Banks]

If I may make a non-sarcastic troll-tastic point:


I like libertarianism and anarchism. But it's too easy to associate them with selfishness "Oh, that's what all the rich Bitcoiners would say, 'Everyone should be able to choose everything for themselves'. How convenient that you guys just so happen to be the richest swines in this techno-hell of a world we have found ourselves in!!!"

This is why I'm relentlessly attacking the political labels that we're all chucking around our discussions here; not because I'm trying to make some sort of high-brow joke that everyone else is the butt of, but to make you see that smart people will use these labels against you.

They will say "you are libertarian, that means you tolerate, but secretly hate the guts of gays/the poor/foreigners/trans-sexuals/welfare lifestylers/popular culture, and this is all because libertarians are right-wing"

So you must stick hard to the principles of these political positions. If someone tries to steer you into a position that corrupts or misrepresents your principles, you must argue effectively and vociferously against it. And you can only do that if you know your principles inside out, I'm pleased that there are good signs that people here do.


So, just remember, it's not about being a libertarian. Libertarian is a single word, and it can be made to mean something different to what you actually believe in, if someone is dedicated to making it so. And other, less informed, people will believe the new definition, not the intended one.

Individual words and their meanings can be subverted by the people with the means to shout the loudest, it has been done many times in the past and it can happen again. It is much more difficult to alter the meaning of principles. Because principles are logical statements, not just some label that can have any association tacked onto it with a pin.

[Walter Rothbard]

If I may make a non-sarcastic troll-tastic point:


I like libertarianism and anarchism. But it's too easy to associate them with selfishness "Oh, that's what all the rich Bitcoiners would say, 'Everyone should be able to choose everything for themselves'. How convenient that you guys just so happen to be the richest swines in this techno-hell of a world we have found ourselves in!!!"

This is why I'm relentlessly attacking the political labels that we're all chucking around our discussions here; not because I'm trying to make some sort of high-brow joke that everyone else is the butt of, but to make you see that smart people will use these labels against you.

They will say "you are libertarian, that means you tolerate, but secretly hate the guts of gays/the poor/foreigners/trans-sexuals/welfare lifestylers/popular culture, and this is all because libertarians are right-wing"

So you must stick hard to the principles of these political positions. If someone tries to steer you into a position that corrupts or misrepresents your principles, you must argue effectively and vociferously against it. And you can only do that if you know your principles inside out, I'm pleased that there are good signs that people here do.


So, just remember, it's not about being a libertarian. Libertarian is a single word, and it can be made to mean something different to what you actually believe in, if someone is dedicated to making it so. And other, less informed, people will believe the new definition, not the intended one.

Individual words and their meanings can be subverted by the people with the means to shout the loudest, it has been done many times in the past and it can happen again. It is much more difficult to alter the meaning of principles. Because principles are logical statements, not just some label that can have any association tacked onto it with a pin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCEUpIg8rE&noredirect=1

[Walter Rothbard]

but to make you see that smart people will use these labels against you.

Absolutely.  I have seen it many times.  You make some very good points.

[Walter Rothbard]

If I may make a non-sarcastic troll-tastic point:


I like libertarianism and anarchism. But it's too easy to associate them with selfishness "Oh, that's what all the rich Bitcoiners would say, 'Everyone should be able to choose everything for themselves'. How convenient that you guys just so happen to be the richest swines in this techno-hell of a world we have found ourselves in!!!"

This is why I'm relentlessly attacking the political labels that we're all chucking around our discussions here; not because I'm trying to make some sort of high-brow joke that everyone else is the butt of, but to make you see that smart people will use these labels against you.

They will say "you are libertarian, that means you tolerate, but secretly hate the guts of gays/the poor/foreigners/trans-sexuals/welfare lifestylers/popular culture, and this is all because libertarians are right-wing"

So you must stick hard to the principles of these political positions. If someone tries to steer you into a position that corrupts or misrepresents your principles, you must argue effectively and vociferously against it. And you can only do that if you know your principles inside out, I'm pleased that there are good signs that people here do.


So, just remember, it's not about being a libertarian. Libertarian is a single word, and it can be made to mean something different to what you actually believe in, if someone is dedicated to making it so. And other, less informed, people will believe the new definition, not the intended one.

Individual words and their meanings can be subverted by the people with the means to shout the loudest, it has been done many times in the past and it can happen again. It is much more difficult to alter the meaning of principles. Because principles are logical statements, not just some label that can have any association tacked onto it with a pin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCEUpIg8rE&noredirect=1

Haha, right after posting that, I viewed this great example of how that word can be misused, and is in fact misused in the clip I posted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYv9CHDc34w

[Carlton Banks]

A good article that really demonstrates some of the stuff I say about political labels and left/right fallacy

(apologies if the title sounds a little bit "Actor Tom Truong", but it's a very very good article)