bitcoin changing my ideology from socialism to libertarianism! What about you?

[Beliathon]

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy"

"Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgment."

Socialism and libertarianism are not necessarily opposites. That's the problem with arguing about these ideological dogmas that place people into separating boxes. Start thinking what the values we want to promote are, and develop a deeper political philosophy. These labels are not addressing the root causes. From Wikipedia article on Anarchism:

"As a subtle and anti-dogmatic philosophy, anarchism draws on many currents of thought and strategy. Anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular world view, instead fluxing and flowing as a philosophy. There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive."

Freedom starts with "I am my own master" but ends before "I am slave to no man". Liberty is the possession of agency, the power to fulfil your own potential. It's important in this modern day and age of mass criminalisation, and of stolen liberties, to understand that the only path to preservation of spirit is through preservation of action.

To preserve our human spirit, we must look not to surrogate father figures, or the great grand institutions but instead to each other, directly from one humble person to another. The Darkness becomes our protective cloak for this nascent perspective.

Great post Genjix. To that I would add these:


"Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
-Robert A. Heinlein

"The question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be... The nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.

“I'm worried that students will take their obedient place in society and look to become successful cogs in the wheel - let the wheel spin them around as it wants without taking a look at what they're doing. I'm concerned that students not become passive acceptors of the official doctrine that's handed down to them from the White House, the media, textbooks, teachers and preachers.”
- Howard Zinn

"We are often told that the poor are grateful for charity. Some of them are, no doubt, but the best amongst the poor are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient, and rebellious. They are quite right to be so. Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion. Sometimes the poor are praised for being thrifty. But to recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less. For a town or country labourer to practise thrift would be absolutely immoral. Man should not be ready to show that he can live like a badly-fed animal. He should decline to live like that, and should either steal or go on the rates, which is considered by many to be a form of stealing. As for begging, it is safer to beg than to take, but it is finer to take than to beg."
-Oscar Wilde

"I see all this potential, and I see it squandered. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables – slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off."
-Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club

“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered”
-Martin Luther King, Jr.

“What good is having the right to sit at a lunch counter if you can’t afford to buy a hamburger?”
-Martin Luther King, Jr.

“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness.
What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places—and there are so many—where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction.
And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”
― Howard Zinn

I would also add President Dwight D. Eisenhower's exit speech from 1961, and John Steinbeck's Nobel prize acceptance speech from Stockholm, 1962

[jonald_fyookball]

"Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
-Robert A. Heinlein

those that want to control others have good intentions and those that dont are curmudgeons...  sounds like BS to me.

[Beliathon]

"Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
-Robert A. Heinlein

those that want to control others have good intentions and those that dont are curmudgeons...  sounds like BS to me.

Sounds like a lack of reading comprehension to me. Read the last sentence aloud repeatedly until you understand the true message of the quote.

Hint: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

[jonald_fyookball]

"Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
-Robert A. Heinlein

those that want to control others have good intentions and those that dont are curmudgeons...  sounds like BS to me.

Sounds like a lack of reading comprehension to me. Read the last sentence aloud repeatedly until you understand the true message of the quote.

Hint: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Not my interpretation.   Last line sounds like hes just throwing a bone.

Are you saying he's being sarcastic ?

[evok3d]

Bitcoin supports the original idea of human trade. The ability to trade from one person to another without having anyone else involved. All the lawmakers are doing their best to turn the peoples attention away from that aspect of it and turn it into all other fiat money. If you look at AirBnB and Uber etc. what remains consistent is that P2P deals will always work out better than a centralized firm.

we neither need socialism or libertarianism or any man made ideology, just more educated people that can take responsibility for themselves and remove the need for any other authorities.

Small communities + p2p trading would definitely change things around.

[iwillwin]

Redistribution of wealth sounds good  but just now I realized that people who work hard and people who don't work as much will have equal wealth which I feel is a bit unfair.

[Beliathon]

Are you saying he's being sarcastic ?

It's not so much sarcasm as it is his writing style.

He's saying: those who want people to be controlled have good intentions, but they have misguided notions about humanity. And the best of intentions doesn't matter when you have bad information.

This man was a science fiction author, which is one of the reasons I chose to quote him. Let me share another Heinlein quote with you:

"I think that science fiction, even the corniest of it, even the most outlandish of it, no matter how badly it's written, has a distinct therapeutic value because all of it has as its primary postulate that [b]the world does change[/b]. I cannot overemphasize the importance of that idea."

Now, bear that quote in mind while you read this:
 
"Before capitalism, there were other ways. Feudalism was what existed in Europe for a thousand years before we had modern capitalism. And before that, slavery - yet another system - another way of organizing who does the work and who gets the profits and so on. And the interesting thing is that every other system that we have a record of in the human race, was born, evolved over time, and eventually passed away. What always has intrigued me, is the need for those people living in capitalism today, to think it's going to be the great exception. It was born, basically in England 300 years ago, it has evolved over the last three centuries. But when you say, "yes, but that means it will also pass away and give rise to another system", people get all kinds of strange worries because they don't want to think about that.

And so they begin to imagine that this system [capitalism] will be forever, in a way no other system in history has proved itself to be."
-Dr. Richard Wolff

[forevernoob]

And so they begin to imagine that this system [capitalism] will be forever, in a way no other system in history has proved itself to be."
-Dr. Richard Wolff

I agree the political system we have today will fail, nothing lasts forever.
But capitalism will always be with us, like it have in the past.
Not pure capitalism but in the form of trade.

People always trade. Even in North Korea, where people engage in black markets because all non-state authorized trade is banned.
It doesn't matter if you are oppressed by a socialist system you still want to trade because it's human nature.

Markets will always exist it's just a question of how limited they will be.

[Beliathon]

But capitalism will always be with us, like it have in the past.

Saying "capitalism will always be with us" is the same as saying, "our world will always be governed primarily by violence". I don't believe that's true, not for one moment.

Dawn of agriculture -> storage of food -> competition for land/human labor -> slavery (we realize its unjust and end it)-> serfdom (we realize its unjust and end it) -> wage-slavery (we realize its unjust and end it) ->

[jonald_fyookball]

But capitalism will always be with us, like it have in the past.

Saying "capitalism will always be with us" is the same as saying, "our world will always be governed primarily by violence". I don't believe that's true, not for one moment.

Dawn of agriculture -> storage of food -> competition for land/human labor -> slavery (we realize its unjust and end it)-> serfdom (we realize its unjust and end it) -> wage-slavery (we realize its unjust and end it) ->

Regardless of what *your* definition of capitalism is.... to many people, it is synomous with "free trade".

Which I agree, will always be around in some form.

[Beliathon]

Regardless of what *your* definition of capitalism is.... to many people, it is synomous with "free trade".

That capitalism necessitates systematic hierarchy-based violence is not a matter of opinion up for debate, it is a self-evident fact.

[forevernoob]

Regardless of what *your* definition of capitalism is.... to many people, it is synomous with "free trade".

That capitalism necessitates systematic hierarchy-based violence is not a matter of opinion up for debate, it is a self-evident fact.

Where lies the violence in wanting to trade freely?
You are the one promoting violence. Not capitalism.

[Beliathon]

Where lies the violence in wanting to trade freely?

Why it's all around you of course. Even in your mind in the forms of fear, jealousy, and hatred. If you cannot see it by now, it is probably beyond my power to cure your blindness. You've been blind a very long time.

The most difficult part about discerning truth from falsehood, is that you must learn to unsee the false reality before you can see reality. You must first forget before you can remember.

Closing your eyes to the false reality is the first step, and because it's so terrifying most never take it. Except those of us who have been forced to by great suffering.

[forevernoob]

Why it's all around you of course. Even in your mind in the forms of fear, jealousy, and hatred. If you cannot see it by now, it is probably beyond my power to cure your blindness. You've been blind a very long time.

That's just a bunch of feelings humans have. Has nothing to do with capitalism.
You don't think the same feelings would exist in a socialist system?
That's a bit funny since you are the one showing hatred towards capitalists. Or anyone with property I guess since you want to take it away from them by force. (using violence)

[Bitmore]

Why it's all around you of course. Even in your mind in the forms of fear, jealousy, and hatred. If you cannot see it by now, it is probably beyond my power to cure your blindness. You've been blind a very long time.

That's just a bunch of feelings humans have. Has nothing to do with capitalism.
You don't think the same feelings would exist in a socialist system?
That's a bit funny since you are the one showing hatred towards capitalists. Or anyone with property I guess since you want to take it away from them by force. (using violence)

That is because what you are picking up is projection, which is common on the left. 

Hatred?   I have never seen hatred for any president as have when the left hated GWB.  The left hates the right like none other, but at the same time accuses those who are not hate filled of hatred.  The irony is brilliant.

Fear?  There is a huge propaganda machine made to make women and minorities feat the right.  It amounts to simple emotional exploitation, calling people racist, sexist and homophobe at the first point of disagreement.  Another form of projection.

Jealousy?  Where do I start.  The left bases it's whole ideological argument on jealousy (Socialism) of those who make any more than anyone else.   Let's start with the term "greed" which is mis-applied to anyone successful, when in fact biblically  it is suppose to identify the benefit or desire of benefit of unearned wealth/income.  In fact it's is the left that is the greedy;  they want to take from those who earn and deserve, and give it to those who don't.

Socialism is a pathology, and the cure is the free will decisions of free men in representative republic. 

Today that does not include democrats who have sold out to our mortal enemies (Marxists).  It also does not include republicans who have sold out to the democrats.  And I don't have an answer that will save us (libertarian) that will get elected.

[jonald_fyookball]

Regardless of what *your* definition of capitalism is.... to many people, it is synomous with "free trade".

That capitalism necessitates systematic hierarchy-based violence is not a matter of opinion up for debate, it is a self-evident fact.

Where lies the violence in wanting to trade freely?
You are the one promoting violence. Not capitalism.

Exactly and this is a total non sequitur.   If you have an orange and I have an apple and we each want to trade, wheres the violence?  Violence only begins when people STOP respecting the principles of free trade.

[Bitmore]

Regardless of what *your* definition of capitalism is.... to many people, it is synomous with "free trade".

That capitalism necessitates systematic hierarchy-based violence is not a matter of opinion up for debate, it is a self-evident fact.

Where lies the violence in wanting to trade freely?
You are the one promoting violence. Not capitalism.

Exactly and this is a total non sequitur.   If you have an orange and I have an apple and we each want to trade, wheres the violence?  Violence only begins when people STOP respecting the principles of free trade.

Exactly.

And a premise to free trade is the requirement of individual liberty and rights, including the rights to property.  To own property is a human right.  

An interesting contradiction is property taxes (real estate).  How can you truly "own" something if in order to keep it you have to surrender more "property" (taxes/money)?

[Beliathon]

To own property is a human right.

According to who? You? Property rights are a set of laws which arose from the cultural-economic traditions of the feudal era, much like inheritance. They're not "human rights".

This is as close as human rights get to property rights, and to you it will probably sound like dirty socialism:

"Economic, social and cultural rights are socio-economic human rights, such as the right to education, right to housing, right to adequate standard of living, right to health and the right to science and culture. Economic, social and cultural rights are recognised and protected in international and regional human rights instruments. Member states have a legal obligation to respect, protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights and are expected to take "progressive action" towards their fulfilment.

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights recognises a number of economic, social and cultural rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is the primary international legal source of economic, social and cultural rights. The Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women recognises and protects many of the economic, social and cultural rights recognised in the ICESCR in relation to children and women. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination prohibits discrimination on the basis of racial or ethnic origin in relation to a number of economic, social and cultural rights. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities also prohibits all discrimination on the basis of the disability including refusal of the reasonable accommodation relating to full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic,_social_and_cultural_rights

Think about it. Just 200 years ago human beings were property (slaves), and in many places only white male adults could own property.

[jonald_fyookball]

To own property is a human right.

According to who? You? Property rights are a set of laws which arose from the cultural-economic traditions of the feudal era, much like inheritance. They're not "human rights".

This is as close as human rights get to property rights, and to you it will probably sound like dirty socialism:

"Economic, social and cultural rights are socio-economic human rights, such as the right to education, right to housing, right to adequate standard of living, right to health and the right to science and culture. Economic, social and cultural rights are recognised and protected in international and regional human rights instruments. Member states have a legal obligation to respect, protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights and are expected to take "progressive action" towards their fulfilment.

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights recognises a number of economic, social and cultural rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is the primary international legal source of economic, social and cultural rights. The Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women recognises and protects many of the economic, social and cultural rights recognised in the ICESCR in relation to children and women. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination prohibits discrimination on the basis of racial or ethnic origin in relation to a number of economic, social and cultural rights. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities also prohibits all discrimination on the basis of the disability including refusal of the reasonable accommodation relating to full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic,_social_and_cultural_rights

Take a step back from abstractions for a minute, and try to answer from
a down to earth point of view.... where/when do you think free trade
breaks down into violence?  Surely you can't argue that 2 people peacefully
trading an orange for an apple is violent.  So under what condition
do you think it begins?  (Please try to answer in simple terms without
saying the word "capitalism"    )

[Beliathon]

where/when do you think free trade breaks down into violence?

Property is the First Theft - the creation of a state of non-equilibrium among men.

Capitalism concentrates the wealth of humanity in the same manner that gravity concentrates the matter of the universe. Larger bodies of wealth have more "financial gravity" -  they siphon wealth away from smaller bodies. This creates inequality, instability, crises, and eventually total collapse.

Private property also creates poverty. With poverty comes desperation and crime. With crime comes violence. So to answer your question, free trade breaks down into violence the moment a starving person tries to take an apple from a wealthy person, and force must be applied to prevent the Second Theft, nature's urge to return to equilibrium.

All things tend toward equilibrium and homeostasis. Capitalism creates a temporary state of non-equilibrium among men; thereby sewing the seeds of its own destruction. This imbalance cannot last forever, judging by present global circumstances I'd say ~300 years is already stretching the limits to the maximum.

So you see, property is cirime; capitalism is violence; hierarchy is chaos. All our instincts compel us back toward equality, compel us to feel empathy, repulse us from tolerating the starvation and suffering of our peers. Capitalism, my friends, is a damned, doomed, dying system.



All things based on myths and lies are mere shadows, and they will melt away when bathed in the light of the information age.