I didn’t know that we have communist on #nostr who promote #Bitcoin. Do they all share one private key?
Discussion
Are you just calling the progressive bitcoiners communists or is there actually a communist account here?
nostr:note1c7g4nhml5c2u8sranw8uqkt0ug4hwzaheagr83lt9t8mgutxqzfssradl6
One of them thinks Rothbard was a communist 😂🤣😂
nostr:note1rym5acsgvq7qxt8essghjy5duhhnd6j6wr3pxeamcuh2f7sgfh9qang9ez
Damn that one won’t load
Why does it always have to be either this or that. Why not a happy middle away from both extremes.
Everyone should feel welcome to voice their viewpoints without being attacked here. Except racists, because fuck racists.
It's a reasonable objection, but consider this: the choice between communism (or any form of coerced collectivism) and classical liberalism is not a sliding spectrum.
Marx and Engels said the essence of their program could be summed up in the phrase, "abolition of private property."
Mises, in direct response, said "the essence of [classical] liberalism is [private property]."
It's "either this or that" because it's a boolean true/false whether 1) private property exists (and thus any coerced redistributuon is outright theft) or 2) whether it can be expropriated by State power.
Check out Bastiat's [The Law](https://cdn.mises.org/thelaw.pdf).
🙏🤙🏼
You are not considering that there are other systems, it’s not only two and a slider in between.
For example study Islamic Economic System. It’s really interesting.
You will probably not agree with it, but it exists and holds very powerful values.
I'm listening...but I don't see how there can be a "third way" between "defend private property" and "abolish private property." If you mean a system where things are held in voluntary communities, or where charity toward one's neighbor is a high priority--I would argue that those are mere variations of "private property." But again, I'm listening...
So thats one aspect:
In Islamic Economy, Private Property is of course allowed.
Hoarding assets is discouraged by tax. For example if you have 5 houses (insert any asset here) and you only use one. You pay tax on having the 4 extra.
If you put those assets into the economy thats fine, renting them for example.
The tax is centrally managed and goes to a clear well defined groups of the economy.
The goal is to allow owning property, yet not deny the economy from their productive value for no reason.
Well, that sounds slightly better than what we have in the U.S. right now, but I would still argue that taxation is robbery. If a person works hard and earns those 5 houses then they should get to enjoy the fruits of their own labor however they see fit. I might try to *persuade* them to share it or make it available for others, but I don't think they should be *coerced* into it.
Of course, if the society is, at large, Islamic/theocratic in nature, then I can see why the State would be used to enforce certain moral standards. I'm opposed to that--coming from the standpoint of Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or any particular religion. I think the law of the land should be limited to retributive (and not redistributive) justice, what some call "Natural Law," summarized as "don't hurt people and don't take their stuff."
But I appreciate this--I didn't know this is how things worked in an Islamic economy before your note, so thank you. (Ain't nostr great?)
“Works hard and earns 5 houses” 🥲
I want stress on two points:
1) You can enjoy the fruits of your labor. Its your hard earned money. If you use the houses, visit them, or even just walk in them once a year. 0 taxes. And you can still own them, no pressure, but if you are that rich, you better help out socienty and the economy.
2) The tax system is voluntary in Islam. It’s a honorary system. Just like praying and fasting.
Very interesting. So, are you saying that paying "voluntary taxes" is more socially/religiously "enforced" than it is enforced by the State? As in, if you don't do it you might get ostracized, shunned, or "excommunicated" from your mosque? That actually makes sense under a theocratic system. I appreciate this.
Oh not at all. One of the first teaching of Islam is "There is no compulsion in religion".
It’s a commitment you chose to abide by, between you and God, you either hold to it or don’t.
The state has nothing to do with it, and mosques/sheikhs don’t hold any power. No matter what the media shows you.
Just like how one might not pray, or not fast, they can also not pay tax. 🤷🏻♂️
There is no shunning or excommunication in islam. I understand why one would think that, what you see from “islamic” countries are not always in 100% in accordance with Islam. Many of them have turned into theocratic systems as you mentioned.
I have learned something today, and I thank you for that.
(BTW, love the profile pic and handle.)
Just thinking about this. So...if taxation is truly voluntary, and not coerced by the State, then it's basically a form of charity--so I would have to categorize this under "private property" plain and simple. I think my original point stands. Don't you think?
Yes and no. Its complicated.
Its a sin not to do it. It’s obligatory between you and God. No one can force you, but its a part of the religion. Makes sense?
Charity, if you don’t do it, it’s not a sin.
Islams Tax (what is called Zakat) is not charity. Tax, has a specific calculation (2.5% of the value), and an asset has to meet certain criteria (eg. 1 year unused) for it require the owner to pay its taxes, and the money goes to specific groups of people (the orphans, poor, etc etc). I am keeping it simple here, this is very difficult to explain in text.
Charity is what ever you want to whomever you want at any time.
This is a higher more spiritual level of commitment.
I see...it's a moral/religious requirement, but it's not a civil/political requirement. It's a "sin" not to pay it, but it's not a "crime' not to pay it.
I guess I would respond that--since religion cannot be enforced--being Muslim in the first place is voluntary, and adherence to the tenets of Islam are also, therefore, voluntary. Wouldn't you agree?
Nice discussion. I learned something new. Thanks for that.
Take a nice zap both for that 🧡⚡️
To me it still is capitalism with voluntary social/moral rules and/or limitations.
I think only due to weak money rich people own things which they actually don’t use (like multiple houses which they down use and leave empty), just because it stores value better than the currency.
This leads to an increase in the price of these items because they are no longer just purchased for their utility but also as a store of value, adding a monetary premium to their price. This can make these items unaffordable for the working class, which results in social problems and often capitalism gets blamed. However, Bitcoin will pull the monetary premium out of all other asset classes, allowing their prices to recalibrate based on their actual utility.
You are too kind! Thank you, humbled.
wasn't nostr a free place??
what's wrong in being communist??
I dont think this guy got it the right way
I actually don't like calling on followers tapping on someelses posts, but this guys is annoying, he keeps on repost quote and try to call a shitstorm on otheres...
that's so twitter/X go back to your X
nostr:note1rw9xhf303cyxy63tw8uhz5una6r9x6pr3prr76clkk59qz26r80qz4cht7
by the way, if you wish, you can share the same keys with others, or make a multisig, are those dirty communists also??? LOLOLOLOL
I think you should read things about communism a little better, not read what capitalists say about communism, cause what you are saying here is just that.
You mix up private property with private belongings!!
no private property means that the means of productions are of everyone, meaning that everyone shall OWN the means with which he produces stuff... simple as that ...
other thing is personal belongings, as a private key, a house, a whatever.
In a communists system people do enjoy the product of their work by having private belongings.
Private property means that the means of productions shall be owned by those who use it to produce.
For instance it means that if you are a developer you should have a computer. You should not exchange your labour or effort to own the stuff you produce with.
I can agree with the idea that Capitalism in it's pure form is not what we have today. But I don't understand how someone who is on a decentralized platform, trying to build a community, wants to promote an individualistic vision of society. Shouldn't we be meant to care about each other?
That's community, it is not capital.
And if nostr is about capital, about having more capital, becoming more rich, well I think I will have to for it and make a communist one
I've read them. They're nuts; religious fanatics fueled by a knock-off version of Christianity.
No thanks.
Welcome to Nostr. Please purple pill your fellow commies.
Alice is a blacksmith and Bob is a farmer. Alice makes a sickle, and her only use for it is to sell it. Bob needs a sickle, but does not pay Alice for it. Alice refuses to give it to Bob. Who is the rightful owner of the sickle?
Our answer is that it belongs to Alice, until she voluntarily transfers it. Am I strawmanning you too think that your answer is Bob because it is one of the means of production for him?
I didn't know nostr is a place for capitalists to become richer.
I thought nostr was a place were we are trying to build a community not a place full of individualistic assholes!
nostr:note1rw9xhf303cyxy63tw8uhz5una6r9x6pr3prr76clkk59qz26r80qz4cht7
You’re thinking of socialists.
They are social and like sharing.
Sharing is caring!
nostr:note1rw9xhf303cyxy63tw8uhz5una6r9x6pr3prr76clkk59qz26r80qz4cht7
I believe it's important to avoid oversimplifying communism or any other complex political ideology. Communism is an ideology based on resource sharing and economic equality, but it goes beyond simply sharing a private key or collectively owning everything. Like any political ideology, there are various shades of thought within communism and different interpretations. It's not accurate to reduce all of communism to a single image or idea. It's important to have an open and respectful discussion about these topics to fully understand them.