Tens of thousands of years of human history of being responsible for your own wealth was trained out of people in a just a few decades. It's 100% not a normal reaction. We need to go back to normality.
Discussion
Well said
Humans tend to have a hard time conceiving of time as it is, let alone how much time and reality changes within a generation. If you're in your 30's, it's pretty much impossible for you to understand what it's like to be 75yo. Simply saying responsibility for personal wealth used to be normal, does not represent reality the way it really was perceived from the phenomenology of individuals. There was hardly any capital to go around for mostly everyone for pretty much the entirety of human history, and hardship was a bigger part of life than ever giving thought to the concept of sovereignty.
Perception of time and generation differences are irrelevant to having 3 denarii and 4 sestertii in your leather pouch.
I think it does. What money was for any given individual has changed from one generation to the next for all of history. What came after the Romans and their coins was a long period of barter and pillage, while most Roman citizens weren't well off because of self custody. They were well off compared to barbarians because of a holistic system of civilization, of which coinage was a major aspect.
Phenomenology is a deciding factor in human action. So are systemic differences. Poverty was a systemic phenomenon for the largest part of history. Poverty is akin to having nothing to take custody of. The only reason we're having this discussion is because we actually have something of value to take custody of. This is a generational phenomenon, because of the influences of innovation.
Silver, gold, salt, have always had centralized depots, taxation and organization according to archeology.
The idea of anyone but elite classes accumulatimg wealth accross generations is very new. "Wealth" in monetary terms anyways.
I'm not sure centralized depots owned by non-person entities, or their processes/organization, have anything to do with the personal sovereignty we're talking about being historically normal. And I think you're assuming that Bitcoin's only purpose is multi-generational inheritance.
Historically all plebs and elites alike would keep their personal wealth at home and spending money on their person and think this was completely normal.
Late reply. Amethyst is not updating me on replies for some reason. Important topic however.
Wealth, was historically held in communities/structures. Not individuals.
A household spending on itself for itself: individual sovereignty, is a situation and culture unique construction.
Some held wealth without even technically owning or controling direct power over anything besides inherited titles. Its hard for us, but easier for those in other societies to understand.
As an example, the accumulated wealth of any two random people might be disproportionately at risk from something as benigh and random as an accident, based on status. Along with their lives.
My issue is with your perspective that we are somehow returning to a state of sovereinghty that was lost, or more dangerously; the idea that we were once sovereign. This is an incomplete view of history.
It implies we know what to do with true sovereignt; digitally enforced individuality. It suggests that we have at present and historicaly the tools, language and thought patterns to deal with such a thing.
I guessing that to you, i'm making a big deal out of a passing comment, but i hope to point out the gun being held by an untrained child.
Nothing like Bitcoin has ever existed. Fear and trepidation to freedom technologies is legitimate and valid (to use blue hair terminology) and we are the best or worst example of it, in real time.
There is no precedent, tread intentionsly, with urgency, and humility.
agreed
nostr:note1q62an68j9wc8yj5n353p6xa86uqz43h7dxyl4pexrurdf4qpvq5quuep4u