It’s my hope that repressed people all over the world will one day soon be able to rally around Bitcoin, instead of Communism, to rise up, throw off their shackles, claim their rights, and defeat elderly corrupt dictators
Nakamoto >> Marx
Property rights >> Statism
True freedom >> Another dictator in different clothing 
Self reliance is true freedom
Do we need some protection program for such people?
And yet, the overlap between Marx and Nakamoto is not only significant but telling. Marx's theory of commodity fetishism and rejection (pace Aristotle) of the notion that any monetary network could conceivably have intrinsic value is - if not a foreshadowing of proof of work (he'd have preferred "proof of labour") - at least a harbinger of the very same. Bitcoiners are closer to the Marxians than they dare admit. And more importantly the reverse is also true.
nostr:note1z3yy2czpx2jrap6vzadp9jazuwlrmdkll62wxkp9tddtgrcxxl9q0q65nv
Eswatini moment.
Certified Swaziland moment.
Could someone help me understand how bitcoin, something that cuts out the central bank and puts money into a collectively owned network isn't communist af? What exactly is being pointed to when comparing bitcoin to communism? surely not authoritarian regimes...
One thing that could help you is looking at all previous cases of communism and digging into how did those end up working.
Can you point to one that wasn't actually just state sponsored capitalism? Just because something rocks the name doesn't mean they are actually that thing i.e. democratic party of united states. The manifesto is pretty clear about community control and the absence of an oppressive regime.
You asked for help and so I thought that reference may help you. It doesn't look like it did.
Sheesh no need to be standoffish bro. Was just trying to understand your perspective.
Oh, I didn't mean to sound offensive. Sorry for that.
I think if your definition of communism is that
- everyone is free to join or leave anytime they want
- everyone is free to use "it" however they want
- people that provide value (e.g. mining) get rewarded with proportional buying power and can spend it on whatever they want
- it can't be subverted/changed by a single "leader"/committee
- it doesn't split people into two classes of "good" and "bad"
Then yes, according to this definition Bitcoin would be communist. I spent couple years living under communism and I would definitely NOT use this definition.
But it wasn't the right communism, next one will be🎉
It gives people private property
We won't own each other's Bitcoin, hence private property. The network will not be collectively owned, decentralization ensures that. And noone could tell you how much you're allowed to spend and for what. Communism takes this all away.
this is why I am here! before Bitcoin I had no hope that this could happen without violence. Now, I believe it’s possible it may take a while, but I keep on saying that we are revolving to higher love forms! 😁❤️
