Socialists in Bitcoin(talk).

[eddie13]

Why only left vs right while their is the entire other dynamic of authoritarian vs libertarian?

Bitcoin is obviously an extremely libertarian concept/tool..
Bitcoin BTFOs the left or right authoritarian straight down to libertarian status..

It probably just so happens that more people on the right are more libertarian than people on the left are..
It takes authority and force to make people obey leftist ideals.. Not so much to be left alone..

[1714156869]

1714156869

[1714156869]

1714156869

[1714156869]

1714156869

[1714156869]

1714156869

[OgNasty]

The Libertarian spirit in this forum that once was a nearly unanimous attitude has turned into a mostly silent presence. It’s amazing to see that as Bitcoin went mainstream and enriched it’s supporters, suddenly the majority of newcomers were “socialists” seeking their piece of the pie. This is when it went from wanting to develop a new system to replace the old, to wanting to sellout in any way possible to assimilate into the old system and raise the price.

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

The Libertarian spirit in this forum that once was a nearly unanimous attitude has turned into a mostly silent presence. It’s amazing to see that as Bitcoin went mainstream and enriched it’s supporters, suddenly the majority of newcomers were “socialists” seeking their piece of the pie. This is when it went from wanting to develop a new system to replace the old, to wanting to sellout in any way possible to assimilate into the old system and raise the price.

demshelvicks. they just want it but won't create it, what ever it is, by what ever means they can take it, today the captured state, because they deserve it, they are the "sophisticated".

and then pretend it was theirs, all along which they enforce with censorship and constant repetition (brainwashing).

just say no, and leave.As said, they can only take, never create. "socialism" is just a catch phraze they use, to hide the reality of their deeds.

advice (to self), don't fall for the label, look at the deeds, the rest are just sounds in the air or visual signs on papers.

to divide us, to loot us, control us, rape us, enlsave us, plunder us, capture us, is their real motto.

away with our sovereignty, independence and liberty they seek to finish,

for our own good and safety, of course.

in short : they are the bambi killers.



dreamin to make us their personal pinochio



and the only way to maintain our liberties, is to be ready to fight them in the harshest way currently possible, to win, by annihilating anything they could imagine.

defeating them won't be easy, but as they hate meritocracy, it's not impossible. the real challenge is to minimize costs, to reach flawless victory, or resaid, their total&integral annihilation.

ps you can see that due to their censorship effort, their bad faith, their absence of logic or coherent thoughts, this forum is decaying, like everything they ever touched.

they are the self prophecy of doom, failures and ruins - the damned.

[franky1]

seems alot of people have no clue about the cultural and political structures.

thinking that a capitalist nation makes everyone prosper and do things for the betterment of common man. is the most idiotic thing to even dream of saying let alone saying it publicly.

capitalist is about guys at the top taking money from those at the bottom,.for the betterment of those at the top.
whereby no laws or regulations exist to stop this.

socialism is where the money that goes in from the top and the bottom helps all. especially those that NEED it rather than just those that WANT it.

too many times people dont actually understand socialism and instead just automatically take media narrative of communism mispronounced as socialism

so here is a question for you

if 200million people earning less than say $25k a year. had to put $2.5k into the treasury
($500billion)
and say 100million higher earners who know some loop holes only had to put in $1k each
($100bill)
would you call that fair?


next. do you prefer that $600billion to be used in which allocation
a.$50bill social security $400bill government contracts linked to politicians. $150bill commerce
b.$50bill social security $400bill commerce $150bill government contracts linked to politicians.
c.$150bill social security $400bill government contracts selected by public need. $50bill commerce

a= communism  b= capitalism   c=socialism

[yhiaali3]

If you believe that the state is the best guarantor of progress and welfare, instead of getting involved in Bitcoin, you'd better support the centralized shitcoin that states are about to create, the digital dollar, the digital euro, the digital pound...and not a currency that takes power away from the state. A currency that is much more difficult to confiscate, and therefore to redistribute, with which it is much easier to cross borders to avoid paying taxes with huge amounts, etc.

I don't know how you reconcile one belief with another.

Your view is completely correct, there is no compatibility between centralization and decentralization, governments are central by nature and want to impose control over everything because of their central nature, so governments according to their current thinking cannot accept the existence of decentralized cryptocurrencies or any decentralized system outside their control, so they work to eliminate Decentralization by creating these central digital currencies that are under their authority and control.
Cryptocurrencies, on the contrary, are taking away the centralization of the government and its control over the entire financial and economic system. It is completely different and I see that it is impossible to reconcile these two systems and the conflict will continue between these two systems until one of them eliminates the other, personally I see the result clearly which is the victory of the decentralization system and cryptocurrencies .

[Cnut237]

I got double-charged for an item in the supermarket the other day. No word from BLM on that. So they're in favour of shops double-charging people, right? 

BLM's central discourse is not based on structural double-charging, as it is on structural racism, and BLM does not praise your supermarket, as it does the Cuban regime, so I'd better not waste my time answering this next time.

The purpose of my ridiculous point was solely to highlight the absurdity of your argument. But we can return to it, if you wish. I was attempting to distill all of the below into a few sentences, but let's have it in long form:

I know about the structural racism in Cuba because some time ago I met people who lived there, but googling:

"Manuel Cuesta, 57, an Afro-Cuban government opponent, says "there are the vestiges and remnants of symbolically cordial racism, structurally hidden, installed in the economic, institutional and political dynamics" of the country."

Source: Racism in Cuba: banned by law, alive on the streets.

Not a word from BLM about structural racism in Cuba.

Okay, so "there are the vestiges and remnants of symbolically cordial racism, structurally hidden, installed in the economic, institutional and political dynamics of the country." Well, of course. Is there a country where this isn't true? What is your point?

I mean, we can take another excerpt from your link:

Cuba used to have an open problem with racism until the communist revolution of 1959. Some buildings had signs saying "no dogs or blacks" while there was also racial segregation that saw black people barred from some clubs and schools. The government has enacted policies to address centuries of inequality due to slavery, which was abolished in 1886, and to promote access to higher education and public office.

So, yay for the communists! ... right? Which kind of undermines your point.

My point is that after the section I quoted, comes this sentence: "But racism persists."
My point is that you often insist on an absolute either/or, and resolutely refuse to consider shades of grey, whether on Venezuela, Cuba, or on the concept that is entirely shades of grey, that is entirely compromise: capitalist democracy.

Racism in Cuba is of course a complex issue, a real world situation with millions of people and many years of history. The elimination of racism, sexism etc., is an ongoing struggle, everywhere. A perfect solution will not be found, but every step in the right direction is to be welcomed.

Your article begins with:

The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation is facing backlash after calling for the end of the U.S. government’s embargo on Cuba while praising the country for its “solidarity with oppressed peoples of African descent” amid  historic anti-government protests.

The BLM comments are clumsy and poorly-timed, yes. But the US embargo has of course had a profoundly detrimental effect on Cuba. This is undeniable, surely? But I will not attempt to claim it is the only problem. The government is hugely at fault, too, as I believe I mentioned some time ago in my criticism of the Cuban regime, and its attempts to stifle press freedom. It's not either/or. It's both. The Cuban government over the years has done some good things, and many bad things. It should be perfectly possible to support the good things, without this being taken as tacit support for the bad things, without this being forced through outrageous contortions into your mangled argument that BLM=bad.

It is a movement that complains about the alleged structural racism in the USA, but not only does it not say a single word about structural racism in Cuba, it defends the dictatorial Cuban regime

This was where you started. The "alleged" structural racism comment I will let slide but again, to anyone with even a slight interest in data (which, on this specific topic, I've posted several times before), it's reminiscent of a certain freedom-lovin' fact-hatin' frequent flyer on the P&S board.
Your argument is that BLM isn't interested (or not interested primarily) in reducing structural, endemic racism in the US because... what? They're secretly (or, in your view, overtly) champions of repression?



I am becoming irritated, and these posts are both overly lengthy, and veering away from the focus on bitcoin. I'll try not to post in this thread again; I'm sure we will pick up these topics again later on, somewhere else, and may perhaps even, eventually, reach some common ground.

Back to bitcoin...

[1miau]

-snip

Well, I am not going to waste any more time because it is clear that we are not going to reach an agreement and even more so when I believe that we are already bordering on demagogy, such as for example

I got double-charged for an item in the supermarket the other day. No word from BLM on that. So they're in favour of shops double-charging people, right?  

BLM's central discourse is not based on structural double-charging, as it is on structural racism, and BLM does not praise your supermarket, as it does the Cuban regime, so I'd better not waste my time answering this next time.

The problem is if you say left wing = USSR...

No.

You're off to a bad start too. Quote me where I said that, otherwise I don't waste my time responding to the rest of what you say.

Well, if you say "no", your point doesn't make any sense at all and you just confirm my point of view, that everyone who disagree is bashed as a "communist".  

If you believe that the state is the best guarantor of progress and welfare, instead of getting involved in Bitcoin, you'd better support the centralized shitcoin that states are about to create, the digital dollar, the digital euro, the digital pound...and not a currency that takes power away from the state. A currency that is much more difficult to confiscate, and therefore to redistribute, with which it is much easier to cross borders to avoid paying taxes with huge amounts, etc.

I don't know how you reconcile one belief with another.

Your view is completely correct, there is no compatibility between centralization and decentralization, governments are central by nature and want to impose control over everything because of their central nature, so governments according to their current thinking cannot accept the existence of decentralized cryptocurrencies or any decentralized system outside their control, so they work to eliminate Decentralization by creating these central digital currencies that are under their authority and control.
Cryptocurrencies, on the contrary, are taking away the centralization of the government and its control over the entire financial and economic system. It is completely different and I see that it is impossible to reconcile these two systems and the conflict will continue between these two systems until one of them eliminates the other, personally I see the result clearly which is the victory of the decentralization system and cryptocurrencies .

You miss a very important point here: There are various forms of "government" and therefore can't be generalized. There are authoritarian regimes (for example North Korea) where the government isn't elected because Kim Jong Un is "given" and can't be replaced (until he dies). People can't vote and can't become a political candidate. There's only one party following the leader.
And then, in opposite, there are democracies, currently the best one in Switzerland, where people can frequently vote bad politicians out and even vote on different issues. In addition, everyone can become a candidate or even found a new political party. Democracies are usually doing the same like decentralized cryptocurrencies: decentralizing power into as many hands as possible and everyone can contribute.
Now, if you compare now North Korea and Switzerland, that's a huge difference of "governments".

A decentralized democracy (like Switzerland) is very similar to decentralized cryptocurrencies.

[eddie13]

Monarchy vs democracy has almost nothing to do with them being authoritarian or libertarian..

It is completely possible for the gov to be a monarchy, like NK, and be damn near anarchy at the same time..

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

If you believe that the state is the best guarantor of progress and welfare, instead of getting involved in Bitcoin, you'd better support the centralized shitcoin that states are about to create, the digital dollar, the digital euro, the digital pound...and not a currency that takes power away from the state. A currency that is much more difficult to confiscate, and therefore to redistribute, with which it is much easier to cross borders to avoid paying taxes with huge amounts, etc.

I don't know how you reconcile one belief with another.

Your view is completely correct, there is no compatibility between centralization and decentralization, governments are central by nature and want to impose control over everything because of their central nature, so governments according to their current thinking cannot accept the existence of decentralized cryptocurrencies or any decentralized system outside their control, so they work to eliminate Decentralization by creating these central digital currencies that are under their authority and control.
Cryptocurrencies, on the contrary, are taking away the centralization of the government and its control over the entire financial and economic system. It is completely different and I see that it is impossible to reconcile these two systems and the conflict will continue between these two systems until one of them eliminates the other, personally I see the result clearly which is the victory of the decentralization system and cryptocurrencies .

wicked gov controlled by the msn and social medias (enemies of mankind), are of course, seeking total control (centralization) on all human activities, from reproduction, food or energy production, they even seek to control the rain that fall on your head !

I guess they know they are obsolete, anyone with a tracking phone can record videos, they won't ever be able to produce or control...

And yes, I agree one must eliminate the other !

[Poker Player]

Why only left vs right while their is the entire other dynamic of authoritarian vs libertarian?

Bitcoin is obviously an extremely libertarian concept/tool..
Bitcoin BTFOs the left or right authoritarian straight down to libertarian status..

It probably just so happens that more people on the right are more libertarian than people on the left are..
It takes authority and force to make people obey leftist ideals.. Not so much to be left alone..

I hadn't thought of it that way but I think the same thing.

The Libertarian spirit in this forum that once was a nearly unanimous attitude has turned into a mostly silent presence. It’s amazing to see that as Bitcoin went mainstream and enriched it’s supporters, suddenly the majority of newcomers were “socialists” seeking their piece of the pie. This is when it went from wanting to develop a new system to replace the old, to wanting to sellout in any way possible to assimilate into the old system and raise the price.

Thank you for your opinion, which is that of someone who has been on the forum for a long time. This is the kind of thing I wanted to discuss, although it would be nice if someone who has been here for a long time and does not think like you could give us his opinion on the matter.

seems alot of people have no clue about the cultural and political structures.

Not thinking like you, you call it having no clue.

thinking that a capitalist nation makes everyone prosper and do things for the betterment of common man. is the most idiotic thing to even dream of saying let alone saying it publicly.

capitalist is about guys at the top taking money from those at the bottom,.for the betterment of those at the top.
whereby no laws or regulations exist to stop this.

socialism is where the money that goes in from the top and the bottom helps all. especially those that NEED it rather than just those that WANT it.

Here you are a little bit right, in most countries of the world there is a mixture of capitalism (freedom of enterprise, respect for private property) with socialism (market regulations and redistribution through taxes), but the picture you paint is almost a caricature, which I will not stop to dismantle because I will not convince you.

-snip

If you notice, I said:

Well, I am not going to waste any more time because it is clear that we are not going to reach an agreement and even more so when I believe that we are already bordering on demagogy, such as for example

I've bolded "we" because I also included myself.

I am becoming irritated, and these posts are both overly lengthy, and veering away from the focus on bitcoin.

Me too, especially about things like this, which I think is the one that triggered me:

As an interesting — to me, at least — aside, my perception of people who vote for right-wing parties (like the Conservative party in the UK) is that they do so specifically because they "have the pathetic notion that they are in this group, or at least favored by them".
I know quite a few people who had a poor upbringing in traditional working-class families and backgrounds, but now vote right-wing. Invariably* this is because they have an inbuilt feeling of inferiority instilled in them from an early age.

That is a leftist elitist argument that has nothing to do with reality.

I'll try not to post in this thread again; I'm sure we will pick up these topics again later on, somewhere else, and may perhaps even, eventually, reach some common ground.

Sure.

Well, if you say "no", your point doesn't make any sense at all and you just confirm my point of view, that everyone who disagree is bashed as a "communist". 

Thank you for answering that bullshit because then everyone can see that what you said is bullshit. Anyone who sees what I write knows that I did not say that and I have asked you to quote me saying it and you have not done so. I'm not going to waste any more time with you. I'll let others be the judge.

[coins4commies]

I don't know any other leftist who prefers a central government over a decentralized proletariat controlled system of rule.  True communism is absent of state and includes a perpetual system where each person in the community has a say over what happens in the community, how the means of production are distributed and how public wealth is allocated.  Basically a DAO.

[tvbcof]

I don't know any other leftist who prefers a central government over a decentralized proletariat controlled system of rule.  True communism is absent of state and includes a perpetual system where each person in the community has a say over what happens in the community, how the means of production are distributed and how public wealth is allocated.  Basically a DAO.

So-called 'Communism' is just a sales pitch for extreme totalitarian centralization of control which is what the marketers are after.  Not surprisingly, that's the way it always works out.  Buyer beware.

[Pbacala]

To OP, you kind of do not understand the concept of being on the left side, we can live in a decentralysed autonomous system and be left side.

[Tash]

A pig stall is a socialist dream come true.
Free food food for life
Roof over the head
Free vaccines/healthcare
Best of comradery
Just chill day in and out, well time for a nap that meal was heavy

[Gyfts]

I had a conversation with a socialist who though bitcoin could work within a socialist society.

Didn't pass even the most basic of tests, as in, the proposed method of extreme government control of all portions of the economy is somehow supposed to coincide with a decentralized currency? Ha, good one!

Socialism works great until you run out of other people's money. And the rich get very stingy, unfortunately. You'll bring out the guillotines quite quickly.

[decodx]

I had a conversation with a socialist who though bitcoin could work within a socialist society.

Didn't pass even the most basic of tests, as in, the proposed method of extreme government control of all portions of the economy is somehow supposed to coincide with a decentralized currency? Ha, good one!

Socialism works great until you run out of other people's money. And the rich get very stingy, unfortunately. You'll bring out the guillotines quite quickly.

It is important not to confuse socialism with dictatorship. A genuine socialist government wouldn't be dictatorial.  On the contrary, the socialist movement (which constitutes the bulk of today's worldwide socialist parties) is overwhelmingly pacifist, democratic, and supportive of civil rights, equality and the right of conscience.

[coins4commies]

Its a really strange phenomenon how righties will convince themselves socialism="big, bad government controls everything" then bury their heads in the sand and never bother to entertain leftist theory while constantly complaining about "socialism"

[tvbcof]

Its a really strange phenomenon how righties will convince themselves socialism="big, bad government controls everything" then bury their heads in the sand and never bother to entertain leftist theory while constantly complaining about "socialism"

The theory is fairly broadly understood.  The practice is well documented and observable...and typically abysmal.

I used to consider myself a 'Socialist' back when I considered the term to mean just society working together to build a better life for all.  When I realized that the 'new' definition was command control of the economy and means of production I ran screaming.  When I grew up that was called Communism (and without exception resulted in a nightmarish a dystopia.  And rapidly.)

Bait and switch.  Just like 'vaccines' which, once indemnification laws were put in place for them, were re-defined so that almost any medication can take on that label and legal protection.

I've read that 'Left wing' relates to the devil sitting on the left shoulder, and Leftists (at least now and probably before also) seem to take delight in lying and deceit to achieve their goals.  At least much more-so than your average right-wing reactionary who are considered 'slow' and 'stupid' by the intelligentsia leftists/pinkos.  It's something more than simple mental deficiencies which make a person prone to honesty, and a lot of the reactionaries understand the pinko ways and means just fine.  That's why  I don't really mind being mistaken for or labeled a 'right winger' even while a lot of my preferences and philosophies are hold-overs from my 'socialist' years.

[Hispo]

Everybody wants to live better, why is that so hard to understand?

Everyone wants to live better but there are some people that are willing to literally sacrifice other's opportunities for them to live better.

Source: I am Venezuelan. I am not told these things, I see them and live them.

Its a really strange phenomenon how righties will convince themselves socialism="big, bad government controls everything" then bury their heads in the sand and never bother to entertain leftist theory while constantly complaining about "socialism"

So it will work next time, wont it?


Edit: grammar.