Thanks for the links, I'm reading some of them. But, let me just say what I'm thinking. First of all, this thread is considering reasonably improbable long-term outcomes to this bitcoin experiment. I say reasonably improbable because there will be powerful governments that will do their utmost to prevent changes to the economic status quo. Just look at Iraq (http://www.rense.com/general34/realre.htm
). So I'm gonna put myself in the shoes of big brother, and here's what I'd do.
I'd switch of the internet - it would cause big problems for me, but perhaps less than bitcoin (or whatever).
I'd buy as many bitcoins as possible - not to destroy them, but to control as much of the underground economy as possible, obviously, I can just print more $crap to buy them with.
Usual scare tactics ("Anarchists seek to destroy economy" etc headlines).
Men in black to seek you out and "convince" you of the error or your ways.
But then, that's not the real problem as I see it. Democracy is not such a stable form of government. Any type of regulation always calls for more regulation right? Eventually it turns into socialism/authoritarian. Even now, western democracy is turning into a corporate aristocracy. But, you know what, that's more stable to perturbation. If a libertarian comes to an authoritarian state, he just has to bend over 'cos there's nothing he can do.
But, if an authoritarian comes to a libertarian state, well he can do lots. He just needs to gain some power at the start, and he can subjugate others to his will. And then... authoritarian micro-states! You can't get rid of a thug unless you become one, and then suddenly we're all thugs and life is reduced to Hobbes' "brutish existence".
What I mean is, libertarianism works fine as long as *everyone* is a libertarian. A minority of authoritarians will destroy it. On the contrary, authoritarianism works fine, it can even be *ruled* by a minority.