Bitcoin as a Form of Anarchy

[zeingrind777]

Bitcoin is a form of anarchy in the economic system. The Bitcoin system is designed to do self-rule and be supported by the application of technological advancements so that it looks amazing for mathematicians and technologists. However, according to the anarchism that has been successfully implemented in Spain, everyone must do the task according to their respective roles so that this concept can succeed.

Expecting Bitcoin to be successful is the same as expecting an anarchist social order to be realized. It seems impossible, but in fact, the social order of anarchy can be done with satisfactory results. The anarchic social order that occurred in the Spanish Revolution which lasted for more than two years before General Franco's invasion succeeded in conquering an area controlled by anarchists.

social anarchy which was also supported by economic anarchy in Spain was carried out extremely. One of them, the community supporting anarchism in Spain at that time burned government money. As a result, coupons (and even just trust) can be used to get fruit and vegetables. If you support Bitcoin to succeed only so that you can then get a lot of Dollars, you only pollute the brilliant concept of Bitcoin anarchy.

[1714095770]

1714095770

[1714095770]

1714095770

[1714095770]

1714095770

[antisocial77]

Its true, anarchy rejects the authority so bitcoin rejects the economic authority so we can use anarchy for bitcoin.my answer is no, bitcoin doesnt need a government support, its based on this.

[hatshepsut93]

Political anarchy can have many forms, there are dozens of school of anarchism like anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-communism, individualist anarchism, green anarchism and so on. They are all very different from each other, so we can't expect that Bitcoin is similar to them all. Additionally, Bitcoin is not a country, so it's not fully correct to compare it with political systems.
And Bitcoin is not purely egalitarian - developers hold more power than an average user, whales hold more power than an average user, miners hold more power than an average user. The strengths of users is in numbers, they create demand for Bitcoin and all other groups have to listen to them. If Bitcoin can be compared to anarchism, it's most closely resembles market anarchism.

[avikz]

Bitcoin is a form of anarchy in the economic system. The Bitcoin system is designed to do self-rule and be supported by the application of technological advancements so that it looks amazing for mathematicians and technologists. However, according to the anarchism that has been successfully implemented in Spain, everyone must do the task according to their respective roles so that this concept can succeed.

Expecting Bitcoin to be successful is the same as expecting an anarchist social order to be realized. It seems impossible, but in fact, the social order of anarchy can be done with satisfactory results. The anarchic social order that occurred in the Spanish Revolution which lasted for more than two years before General Franco's invasion succeeded in conquering an area controlled by anarchists.

social anarchy which was also supported by economic anarchy in Spain was carried out extremely. One of them, the community supporting anarchism in Spain at that time burned government money. As a result, coupons (and even just trust) can be used to get fruit and vegetables. If you support Bitcoin to succeed only so that you can then get a lot of Dollars, you only pollute the brilliant concept of Bitcoin anarchy.

Anarchy is an anti-government social order and rejects the state system. My question is, do you think Bitcoin doesn't need regulation from the government or the state? and also does Bitcoin not require government support?

Now there are more than one definition of Anarchy. What you have mentioned is one which doesn't really go with bitcoin whatsoever and look below for the second one,

"Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal"

This definition is partly true for bitcoin but not completely! Also I believe, government regulation is necessary for the growth of bitcoin! Without government support, mass adoption is not possible! But I literally find no similarities of bitcoin with anarchy so we are not polluting anything! We all have to live within a system and we want the system to adopt bitcoin! It makes no sense in going out of the system and adopt it!

[Jating]

Anarchy? I wouldn't completely say that bitcoin did cause or will cause anarchy in the economic system and I don't think that this is Satoshi's goal.

How can it cause anarchy when it wasn't yet adopted globally? It is deem as as store of value and investment instrument. We have gold as the top store of value and then a lot of assets out there that is also an investments and no one question them as anarchist or something.

Still they can question that bitcoin doesn't have central authority, can easily be manipulated because there is no regulation and such. But still, I don't think that it will cause chaos and anarchy in the financial world.

[iamverybusyperson]

I dont think it's gonna work. Bitcoin is not private and not fast enough to change fiat money. Other crypto could, but they not popular.

[eternalgloom]

I don't know if I really follow that comparison. I mean, with Bitcoin it's all about who has most mining power, at least when it comes to the people who generate their own Bitcoins. We're long past the days where anyone could just mine Bitcoins with their personal computer, now it requires vasts sums of capital.
You could say the same about trading, it's the people who have the most capital, who stand to make most out of Bitcoin.

So where exactly does anarchism come in? I can see that there could be one aspect of anarchism embedded into Bitcoin, so paying for goods and services with Bitcoin and with Bitcoin alone.
The thing is, most businesses convert their Bitcoin earnings instantly to fiat. I only know of a couple of companies that actually keep their Bitcoin revenue in Bitcoin. Even then it's not 100% of their revenue.

[seoincorporation]

I dont think it's gonna work. Bitcoin is not private and not fast enough to change fiat money. Other crypto could, but they not popular.

Isn't private because the blockchain is public information, but you can always use a mixer service , and change it for fiat doesn't take more than 1 hour if you do it by the right way.


But getting back on topic, i don't think we should compare bitcoin with anarchy because is like more like a 3 divided power system: Miners, Coders and Users. Each one of them could take decisions if a good idea comes out. Is just my point of view.

[romero121]

These days the difficulty in mining has increased tremendously, but it needs some community to take it further without which the network gets collapsed. When we state bitcoin as anarchy it needs to be clear that there isn't any governing body which is completely against the ruling authorities.

To my understanding the decentralized state of the network is misinterpreted at times which too is a kind of manipulation of the market.

[Artemis3]

Bitcoin can exist with or without government support. Its money that is out of control from the State, it can be useful to anyone willing to use a money that can't be manipulated by the State, or any private institution.

If anarchists decide to use it, its their choice because they studied it and found it useful.

They can also give a try at making their own altcoin, hopefully not deviating too much from Bitcoin. Community money isn't new, but crypto is far more secure.

As for Spain, one reason Franco won was the irreconcilable division between communists and anarchists. Another would be Hitler's aid... Spain went back to being a monarchy ever since the fall of the republic, a bit before WWII.

[zeingrind777]

Political anarchy can have many forms, there are dozens of school of anarchism like anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-communism, individualist anarchism, green anarchism and so on. They are all very different from each other, so we can't expect that Bitcoin is similar to them all. Additionally, Bitcoin is not a country, so it's not fully correct to compare it with political systems.
And Bitcoin is not purely egalitarian - developers hold more power than an average user, whales hold more power than an average user, miners hold more power than an average user. The strengths of users is in numbers, they create demand for Bitcoin and all other groups have to listen to them. If Bitcoin can be compared to anarchism, it's most closely resembles market anarchism.

Yes, anarchy does have many branches, one branch of the ideology of anarchism is a market free of anarchy (anarchy capitalist). Okay, I agree that bitcoin is included in anarchy capitalism.

Still they can question that bitcoin doesn't have central authority, can easily be manipulated because there is no regulation and such. But still, I don't think that it will cause chaos and anarchy in the financial world.

I'm not saying that anarchy is chaos. What I mean is a socialist economic system without government. coordination and management, without the bureaucratic rules that are broadly defined as being superior in economic, political and administrative areas

[jseverson]

How can mass adoption occur if there is no support from the government?

without government support, there will be no major adoption in a country. It cannot achieve the success of bitcoin to be used globally.

Governments didn't support (and most still don't) Bitcoin for the longest time, and it's gotten to the point where even the President of the United States has tweeted about it. Adoption is happening and governments can't claim any credit.

Bitcoin doesn't need government support; in fact, the most ideal scenario for it is complete non-intervention from governments. Bitcoin is inherently anarcho-capitalistic, so the idea that it needs outside intervention is pretty misguided. Support could even be detrimental in some cases, considering the fact that it will surely come with some sort of compromise.

[pooya87]

just because bitcoin is not the same system as we are use to that doesn't make it an "anarchy". for starters bitcoin is not a society to want a government and it is not defying the authority of the government. bitcoin is a currency or a payment system that has its own rules and laws and it is sticking to them. and lets not forget that it all started because the current payment systems were severely flawed and also corrupted and needed fixing.

[Broly46]

Money itself is a form of anarchy too, we should go back to barter system, no dollar no currency no fiat no crypto, but people with higher IQ don’t want to do that, they want to be the only 0.1% of elites of the elites.

[Kakmakr]

Bitcoin is the naughty child and the fox in the Hen house and Anarchists just love the disruptive impact that it has on the current financial system and also the uncontrollable nature of the technology. Governments only realized too late that Crypto currencies cannot be stopped and that they will have to adapt to a whole new way of thinking to try and regulate it.  

Libra woke the Giant in the US and governments are now very focused on regulating Crypto currencies to protect their reserve currencies, because Crypto currencies can have a huge affect on the value of their local currencies.  

[harvestt]

Libra woke the Giant in the US and governments are now very focused on regulating Crypto currencies to protect their reserve currencies, because Crypto currencies can have a huge affect on the value of their local currencies.  

We still do not know what the launch of Libra will lead to, but I think it will be very interesting

[erricducducan26]

Maybe you're right cpz btc can't be fully regulated by govs

[Coyster]

You may have a point, but anarchy is too strong a word to use, bitcoin isn't in any way trying to oppose government rules or system of payments all it does is provide a more comfortable and accessible means or method of payment, one that is decentralized and puts control in the hands of people.

Bitcoin can in no way be anarchical, as it doesn't intend to overthrow the government or it's system of payment

[Artemis3]

I'm not saying that anarchy is chaos. What I mean is a socialist economic system without government. coordination and management, without the bureaucratic rules that are broadly defined as being superior in economic, political and administrative areas

Unfortunately for most of the "left" world socialist economy means quite the opposite: Major state economic intervention, "command" central planned economy, absolute control (replacing the market with their own, whatever...) The opposite to what Bitcoin represents, which renders the State powerless in regards to money.

But yes, i can see anarchists liking it, others hating it, and some wanting to make their own variant. That's the point...

I live in a "socialist" country that denounces anarchism, while some urban-anarchists support it because "the right is worse"... And the result has been abysmal to the masses. None of the State officials are in need of anything, while most of the people are.

[LeGaulois]

Anarchy is an anti-government social order and rejects the state system. My question is, do you think Bitcoin doesn't need regulation from the government or the state? and also does Bitcoin not require government support?

Cypherpunks are all anarchists, directly or not. Satoshi comes from this type of person.
No, Bitcoin doesn't need to be overloaded with regulations, basically, it doesn't need any. Look yourself, over the past decade, Bitcoin has been doing pretty well with almost no regulation.
Bitcoin was created to avoid these same regulations (and more), why accepting again to be controlled when a new currency supposed to be decentralized appears. Better to go back to fiats if we're still controlled by someone.