I made this video on the ostracism happening against Bitcoin libertarians

[darkmule]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRAYT2gaAqw

reddit thread if you want to help spread this message by upvoting:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/20ect1/i_made_this_video_on_the_ostracism_happening/

Seriously?

Quit your bitching.  Libertarianism is easily the predominant thread among Bitcoiners.  You sound like some whiny-ass Christian claiming you're being persecuted for your religion in a 90%+ Christian country.  Get over yourself.

[1715354931]

1715354931

[1715354931]

1715354931

[1715354931]

1715354931

[1715354931]

1715354931

[1715354931]

1715354931

[1715354931]

1715354931

[Mike Christ]

I don't think arguing about anarchism is productive until the theory can be applied; what matters is that people understand ethics and reason before we get to the point where it must be applied, then we can observe what a virtuous society does in the absence of central government.

[Bit_Happy]

This forum used to be much more "libertarian", but then the masses arrived. 

[drrussellshane]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRAYT2gaAqw

reddit thread if you want to help spread this message by upvoting:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/20ect1/i_made_this_video_on_the_ostracism_happening/

Seriously?

Quit your bitching.  Libertarianism is easily the predominant thread among Bitcoiners.  You sound like some whiny-ass Christian claiming you're being persecuted for your religion in a 90%+ Christian country.  Get over yourself.

It isn't quite that simple.

Bitcoiners might be predominantly libertarian, but not all bitcoiners are developers.

There need to be certain developers with a libertarian slant to offset the statist tendencies of some other developers. As Bitcoin becomes less "fringe", more developers will come on board who may or may not have Bitcoin's original intention in mind. There must be a constant supply and availability of liberty-loving developers to prevent Bitcoin from being co-opted by unsavory groups.

This isn't about political opinions of people who use Bitcoin; this is about the protection of the core of Bitcoin as a protocol.

[Bit_Happy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRAYT2gaAqw

reddit thread if you want to help spread this message by upvoting:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/20ect1/i_made_this_video_on_the_ostracism_happening/

Seriously?

Quit your bitching.  Libertarianism is easily the predominant thread among Bitcoiners.  You sound like some whiny-ass Christian claiming you're being persecuted for your religion in a 90%+ Christian country.  Get over yourself.

It isn't quite that simple.

Bitcoiners might be predominantly libertarian, but not all bitcoiners are developers.

There need to be certain developers with a libertarian slant to offset the statist tendencies of some other developers. As Bitcoin becomes less "fringe", more developers will come on board who may or may not have Bitcoin's original intention in mind. There must be a constant supply and availability of liberty-loving developers to prevent Bitcoin from being co-opted by unsavory groups.

This isn't about political opinions of people who use Bitcoin; this is about the protection of the core of Bitcoin as a protocol.

Also a typical Open Source project can be forked, but with BTC it's not that simple.

[darkmule]

This forum used to be much more "libertarian", but then the masses arrived. 

So basically, Bitcoin was really awesome until people started actually using it.

You sound like the kind of hipster who loved fixed gear bicycles and Pabst Blue Ribbon before it was cool.

[Bit_Happy]

This forum used to be much more "libertarian", but then the masses arrived. 

So basically, Bitcoin was really awesome until people started actually using it.

You sound like the kind of hipster who loved fixed gear bicycles and Pabst Blue Ribbon before it was cool.

I said "this forum", not Bitcoin.
People who were here before June 2011 are better able to understand what happened to this place.
Sorry you missed out...

[drrussellshane]

This forum used to be much more "libertarian", but then the masses arrived. 

So basically, Bitcoin was really awesome until people started actually using it.

You sound like the kind of hipster who loved fixed gear bicycles and Pabst Blue Ribbon before it was cool.

I said "this forum", not Bitcoin.
People who were here before June 2011 are better able to understand what happened to this place.
Sorry you missed out...

I know what you mean.

The libertarian streak in this forum is still pretty strong though, although it has changed, and been dulled somewhat by the influx of people who have not put much thought into political matters and things pertaining to rights and Liberty and little ole things like that.

[Bit_Happy]

This forum used to be much more "libertarian", but then the masses arrived. 

So basically, Bitcoin was really awesome until people started actually using it.

You sound like the kind of hipster who loved fixed gear bicycles and Pabst Blue Ribbon before it was cool.

I said "this forum", not Bitcoin.
People who were here before June 2011 are better able to understand what happened to this place.
Sorry you missed out...

I know what you mean.

The libertarian streak in this forum is still pretty strong though, although it has changed, and been dulled somewhat by the influx of people who have not put much thought into political matters and things pertaining to rights and Liberty and little ole things like that.

Agreed:
This is still one of the best places on the Internet (on a good day)
You have to dig more to find "the good parts" / Too much static and the signal is weaker.

[Rampion]

Syndicalism tends towards fascism, not freedom. 1930's Italy, German and the U.S. were all broadly syndicalist. Two of them ended up with fascist dictatorships and the third came close (see John T Flynn "As We Go Marching" for a detailed account).  

Yours is a gross oversimplification at best. You are ignoring, among other things, that in the 1930s the biggest and more relevant trade-union in Europe was the Confederacion General del Trabajo (CNT), with more than 1.000.000 affiliates in the mid-1930s, and together with the FAI it was precisely the forefront against the fascist counter-revolution. The CNT-FAI was able to control a territory (Aragón and part of Catalonia) for 8 years and installed an anarchist society which did not tend toward fascism at all, until it was crushed precisely by the army of Francisco Franco together with the help of the Russian KPSS.

Furthermore, Italy was not "broadly syndicalist" and thus "it tended to fascism". Trade-unions had a minor relevance in Italy in the first 20 years of the Century, and when fascism raised strongly as an opposition to the Russian revolution of 1917 its first actions consisted in beating up precisely trade-unions members. Trade-unions gradually lost any relevance until 1923, when Mussolini established a single, vertical trade-union that made "unnecessary" those founded by the workers themselves. The fascist trade-union in Italy was a joke as it didn't represent the workers but the fascist party itself, and it was a totally vertical organization, which as you might understand is completely opposed to the anarchists organizations which are always horizontal.

Finally, it should be added the huge impact that trade-unionism had in UK, Scandinavia or Australia (just to name a few territories), which never gravitaded towards fascism.

As for the impossibility of a modern technological society without markets, prices  and private property, see Mises on the Economic Calculation Argument (never refuted).  

While all anarchists are against private property, not all of them are against markets and prices: Proudhon's idea of a working economy in an anarchist society was mutualism, in which free market is a fundamental piece. In any case and besides Mises theories, the hard cold fact is that anarchism was tested empyrically only once (Aragón 1930-1938), and it was a successful experience. It should be noted nevertheless that the duration of such community was short lived (only 8 years) and its size was relatively small (less than 100k individuals living in it).

On the contrary, I'd say that the type of society the "an-caps" are looking for has been thoroughly tested in the past: the middle ages, with their lack of states or nations but the presence of private property (established by force, as usual), seems a good test-case for the "anarcho-capitalist" society. In fact, Rothbardian's like to point out how prosperous Medieval Iceland was, and they consider it as an example of the ideal society. I would add that while Medieval Iceland was quite peaceful for middle ages standards, it remains the fact that it was a hugely unbalanced society were the majority of poor had to work for the minority of rich, and where justice or safety was available only to those able to pay for it (a minority).

[genjix]

common production just makes sense. why work for anyone else but yourself. it's the only sustainable economic model and bitcoin empowers it. esp with multisig and other tools. i see many possibilities for using markets in this way.
more than anything we can invest in technology and better industrial tools rather than buying tvs or other good given to us- long term we all end up better together.

http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Practical_Post-Scarcity_Video

instead of small toys (porsche, luxury apartment .etc), have the best and biggest toys (industry, farms, techno infrastructure, production, large scale construction). it's my aim
https://wiki.unsystem.net/index.php/UnSYSTEM/OpenSource_city

Mi staras kun vi, amiko!

En pli ol unu maniero ni estas samideanoj.

Dankon kaj mi kun vi, unu al la alia.

Malfelicxe la plej bonaj ideoj ne cxiam sukcesas. Sed Bitmono estas bonega ideo kiu sukcesos.

[cbeast]

common production just makes sense. why work for anyone else but yourself. it's the only sustainable economic model and bitcoin empowers it. esp with multisig and other tools. i see many possibilities for using markets in this way.
more than anything we can invest in technology and better industrial tools rather than buying tvs or other good given to us- long term we all end up better together.

http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Practical_Post-Scarcity_Video

instead of small toys (porsche, luxury apartment .etc), have the best and biggest toys (industry, farms, techno infrastructure, production, large scale construction). it's my aim
https://wiki.unsystem.net/index.php/UnSYSTEM/OpenSource_city

That's something I hope to bring to the Philippines someday.

[aminorex]

Rampion, can you take a minute and tell us who, exactly, it is that creates "individuals who do not own any means of production"?

Your momma?

[Bit_Happy]

Syndicalism tends towards fascism, not freedom. 1930's Italy, German and the U.S. were all broadly syndicalist. Two of them ended up with fascist dictatorships and the third came close (see John T Flynn "As We Go Marching" for a detailed account).  

Yours is a gross oversimplification at best. You are ignoring, among other things, that in the 1930s the biggest and more relevant trade-union in Europe was the Confederacion General del Trabajo (CNT), with more than 1.000.000 affiliates in the mid-1930s, and together with the FAI it was precisely the forefront against the fascist counter-revolution. The CNT-FAI was able to control a territory (Aragón and part of Catalonia) for 8 years and installed an anarchist society which did not tend toward fascism at all, until it was crushed precisely by the army of Francisco Franco together with the help of the Russian KPSS.

Furthermore, Italy was not "broadly syndicalist" and thus "it tended to fascism". Trade-unions had a minor relevance in Italy in the first 20 years of the Century, and when fascism raised strongly as an opposition to the Russian revolution of 1917 its first actions consisted in beating up precisely trade-unions members. Trade-unions gradually lost any relevance until 1923, when Mussolini established a single, vertical trade-union that made "unnecessary" those founded by the workers themselves. The fascist trade-union in Italy was a joke as it didn't represent the workers but the fascist party itself, and it was a totally vertical organization, which as you might understand is completely opposed to the anarchists organizations which are always horizontal.

Finally, it should be added the huge impact that trade-unionism had in UK, Scandinavia or Australia (just to name a few territories), which never gravitaded towards fascism.

As for the impossibility of a modern technological society without markets, prices  and private property, see Mises on the Economic Calculation Argument (never refuted).  

While all anarchists are against private property, not all of them are against markets and prices: Proudhon's idea of a working economy in an anarchist society was mutualism, in which free market is a fundamental piece. In any case and besides Mises theories, the hard cold fact is that anarchism was tested empyrically only once (Aragón 1930-1938), and it was a successful experience. It should be noted nevertheless that the duration of such community was short lived (only 8 years) and its size was relatively small (less than 100k individuals living in it).

On the contrary, I'd say that the type of society the "an-caps" are looking for has been thoroughly tested in the past: the middle ages, with their lack of states or nations but the presence of private property (established by force, as usual), seems a good test-case for the "anarcho-capitalist" society. In fact, Rothbardian's like to point out how prosperous Medieval Iceland was, and they consider it as an example of the ideal society. I would add that while Medieval Iceland was quite peaceful for middle ages standards, it remains the fact that it was a hugely unbalanced society were the majority of poor had to work for the minority of rich, and where justice or safety was available only to those able to pay for it (a minority).

What if classes cannot be eliminated under any system?
There is a chance that free-markets offer the best conditions for the largest number of people.

[Anon136]

can i go ahead and coin cryptarian?

[darkmule]

I said "this forum", not Bitcoin.
People who were here before June 2011 are better able to understand what happened to this place.
Sorry you missed out...

You sound so amazingly cool.  I bet you have a whole basement full of fedoras, you fuck.

[theymos]

The community has definitely been diluted quite a bit with non-libertarians. In the early days, this was basically an ancap forum. But I always expected that this would happen, and while it makes things a lot less fun and more tiresome, it's not all bad. Now is a great opportunity to spread the idea of freedom. Bitcoin is at its core a force for freedom, and nothing will completely eliminate that. There's also still a "libertarian conspiracy" controlling many important Bitcoin assets, and many of the early adopters who made a ton of money are libertarian, so we're in a great position to make some real advances in the direction of a free society.

[sergio]

Great video, you forgot Richard Stallman the creator of the GPL, Manning and Snowden also.

[darkmule]

The community has definitely been diluted quite a bit with non-libertarians. In the early days, this was basically an ancap forum. But I always expected that this would happen, and while it makes things a lot less fun and more tiresome, it's not all bad. Now is a great opportunity to spread the idea of freedom. Bitcoin is at its core a force for freedom, and nothing will completely eliminate that. There's also still a "libertarian conspiracy" controlling many important Bitcoin assets, and many of the early adopters who made a ton of money are libertarian, so we're in a great position to make some real advances in the direction of a free society.

To an extent, libertarianism is built into the technology itself, so anyone using it is adopting at least some of the ideology.  After all, Bitcoin wouldn't work without consensus.

However, if it's going to impact society, we're pretty much at the tipping point here.  When hundreds of millions in fiat start disappearing into a vacuum, society (or more specifically government) starts to get concerned, and ongoing incidents like Gox are more or less forcing the hand of law enforcement.  A few million disappearing into a Ponzi scheme like pirateat40's can be disregarded as Wild West phenomena.  Something like Gox can't.

Either Bitcoin is going to self-regulate on a voluntary, consensus-based approach, or the Bad Guys (the government) are going to step in.  And they're going to fuck it up and do it badly, like they do most things.

[Rampion]

What if classes cannot be eliminated under any system?
There is a chance that free-markets offer the best conditions for the largest number of people.

Anarchists are not necessarily against free markets. They are for self organization, self management and for the workers themselves owning the means of productions, but many support the idea of workers federations, cooperatives and individuals interacting in free markets. That's for example Proudhons and also Bakunins idea, while only a minority of Anarchists were against private ownership of the fruits of one's Labour and thus consider free markets unnecessary - for example Kropotkin supported the idea of the socialization of works Labour too, as he considered it the most efficient way to distribute wealth - and that's why he is considered as an exponent of a minority of anarcho-communists.

There's also a minority (but very relevant in theAnAnglo Saxon world) influenced by Rothbard that is not even against the private ownership of the means of production, but I won't even call them Anarchists at all.