Actually, Bitcoin is not the first bloodless revolution. If you look a little back, there was the Indian revolution started by Ghandi more than 100 years ago.
And there's also the South African revolution by Nelson Mandela.
All revolutions imply bloodsheds. This is why revolution flags are always red.
And the list may continue. All revolutions had their bloodbaths.
Not really, that's why there are velvet revolutions, and since you've mentioned it, Romania was the only one that had a violent revolution at the fall of the Warsaw pact!
These posts answer best to your statements:
The South African revolution was not without any bloodshed at all. Many black people killed other black people who were seen as government collaborators, informers and black policemen. The executioners would force a car tyre over the head and around the arms of the suspect, drench it in petrol, and set it alight. (Also called, Necklacing)
During the unrest periods, many people were shot and killed and lots of blood were shed during those times. Nelson Mandela were involved in the bombing of many power plants and strategic installations.
These revolutions were not bloodless in the grand scheme of things
Heck, Ghandi himself was assassinated.
And, if those replies were not convincing yet, maybe this image clear things better:
Don't know why you hated that guy that much compared to our own commies but you're the only ones that executed somebody then and that had the army firing on its own fellow countrymen.
Your answer can be found, in part, in this post of mine (obviously, this is only a small part of the horrors we had to live in Ceausescu era):
I lived, in part, what you wrote above. Although I was very young when Ceausescu was taken down I still remember many things which occurred during his regime. It is difficult to explain in words. Just a small example, all food was rationalized. And, depending of the number of the family members, you were allowed to buy only a (small) quantity of milk, flour, corn flour, oil, sugar or meat each month. Now excepting the fact that what you were allowed to was a very small amount, you also had to do extreme efforts for obtaining the aliments. For example, if a grocery store was opening at 7am, you had to go there since 1-2am to make sure you get a good spot in the queue, thus at 7am when the store would open you would have the chance to obtain your milk or oil or what you needed. If you joined the queue at 6am you had no chance to buy anything as until your place would come to enter the store everything was finished already. During the nights people used to make huge queues at each such store, sometimes even more than 100 people forming a queue...
Meat was even scarcer than anything. And I am not talking about fish, beef or some delicacy. People mostly had the right to buy chicken and pork meat and the chickens from the stores were always so small that they looked like they starved a month before being brought to the stores.
Annually, each citizen was entitled to 60-70 kg of meat and meat derivatives, 8-10 kg of fish and fish derivatives, 210-230 liters of milk or milk derivatives, 260-280 eggs, 16 kg of fats (oil, butter etc.), 170-180 kg of vegetables, 70-90 kg of potatoes, 65-95 kg of fruits, 22-26 kg of sugar. All products were stamped on a paper card or on a sort of register book, for making sure the citizen would not buy more than he was entitled to. The shopping could be made only once per month and only at the grocery shop from the neighborhood. In 1984 the portions were reduced even more: 39 kg of meat, 78 liters of milk, 166 kg of vegetables. The oil and the sugar could be bought also just once per month and only 1 kg of each of them.
Those caught with shenanigans regarding food (buying more, buying from illegal sources etc.) could face 6month - 5 years of jail.
Register for buying bread in Ceausescu era
Register for buying sugar in Ceausescu era
Register for buying cloths (yes, even cloths were rationalized) in Ceausescu era
The huge monthly queues at grocery shop in Ceausescu era (PIINE means BREAD and ALIMENTARA means GROCERY SHOP)Satoshi never intended to be a revolution leader, yet his creation -- Bitcoin -- revolutionized the entire world. It took the power from the hands of elites and gave it back to people.
And where did this happen?
In what country has the elite lost control of the people that use bitcoin? Let's be real!
In all countries. Whenever a bitcoiner makes a new anonymous, peer-to-peer transaction with someone else, that's one more transaction which is not controlled by the State. Whenever a bitcoiner attempts to press "Send" from his wallet there is nobody in the entire world who can stop him.
As the others said, appreciate the enthusiasm but it is way too early to claim a revolution or the outcome of it, you're at least one decade too early on declaring the success of something that has barely taken root, not even close to sprouting!
And when you think that, maybe, same words were said about this guy too...
After reading this, the scale of black market and digital economies and the effect Bitcoin will have on them I am pretty certain we are going to be very wealthy men -- even with a sum as small as 10 Bitcoins. It's just so hard to believe. We are only in the beginning storms with these significant rallies from 10 to 20 dollars. I will not be surprised to see prices from hundreds to thousands in the coming months.
The world just isn't going to be the same and we have been blessed as the pioneers.
I admire the passion of OP, bitcoin is truly a revolutionary concept.
Just coming to say that I am loving reading your posts. So on point
Thank you. If you want to read more similar posts of mine, you can find them at the bottom of
this topic.
Governments and banks are afraid of it, they aren’t afraid of altcoins. Nope bitcoin is the problem because it is disruptive to their system.
Indeed. Why else FBI contacted Gavin Andresen and tried to find who Satoshi is, while all other altcoin creators appear everywhere with their full names and no secret agency comes after them?
Interesting view but lets not forget that Bitcoin "revolution" is just getting started. [...] Also lets not forget that because Bitcoin's "revolution" is mainly taking place in the digital world, the bloodshed is also taking place in the virtual world.
True. Yet, this does not diminish the fact that Bitcoin managed to run a revolution without implying physical violence, does it?
Don't you mean rules for radicals?
Big thumb up for recognizing those rules. It's a sign that you are a well educate person and I am congratulating you for that. Nowadays so few people read books, so few keep educating themselves by constantly reading...
I get your point and it is very positive for bitcoin. What I would still say is that bitcoin is more of a very advance evolution rather than a revolution in the real term. A revolution is usually a total reset and the start of something completely different.
Does Bitcoin look like anything which happened before?
industrial revolution
This is what I was also thinking. OP got a bit carried away
Let's not get too much into semantics. I am sure that all understood the message of this thread. Looking for small mistakes is typically human, yet this is not the point -- debunking sentence by sentence. I could also argue and say the even during Industrial Revolution there were victims --
but it would be pointless... The important part is what Satoshi achieved and where Bitcoin led us in the past decade...
