If the axiom of resistance is incorrect, Bitcoin's ability to remain permissionless and censorship-resistant is compromised.
Discussion
Wat.
Censorship resistance is only guaranteed if you can afford to incentivize a miner to mine your TX.. Bitcoin's ability to remain permissionless depends on having internet access and a device capable of running Tor or Tails.
Its not accurate to only look at the network itself and ignore the context it exists in.
If Bitcoiners don't actually want to *disintermediate the legacy system* (ie fuck the banks),
then the legacy system will co-opt Bitcoin through regulatory capture.
As time goes on and there are more normie adjacent people in Bitcoin, the consensus of *what Bitcoin does* changes.
If that continues, it will become a nerfed speculative asset. Not necessarily because of a hostile fork situation (although possible) but simply because the "axiom of resistance" is false.
ie
nostr:note1v0l6vlgkjkxpkrdw6uqhy9p5r6835jr298qz8ke2j508vs2jheqs8lwdly
and yeah
you'll probably still be able to bribe a N Korean miner to get your transaction through in a few days.
That isn't censorship resistant.
If the user does not resist the censor, then no technology can provide him censorship resistance.
Security is always a human affair.
That it's possible to resist state controls?