Nostr Web Client

Replying to d4760b16...

You read a lot of material about bitcoin. But you seem to only read material that has a right wing libertarian ancap angle. Too me one of the biggest problems bitcoin faces is the RW domination of narrative, when bitcoin is equally a perfection of communism as well as capitalism.

Recently I came across a mathematician whose about to publish a paper that proves Bitcoin's zero entropy makes it both capitalist/communist, individualist as well as collectivist.

My question to you is will you read this material publicly? Or will you edit it out of existence and therefore keep perpetuating the myth that bitcoin is a right wing fulfillment of the austrian school when it is equally a fulfillment of Marx?

hh 2y ago

There is no intersection between BTC and the economics of Marxism.

Marx's labor theory of value is the most absurd, ridiculous and laughable piece ever written. It's literal nonsense. Most importantly, Marx's understanding of human incentives and motives is completely wrong. A fantasy without roots in reality.

Anyone who in this day and age bases his understanding of political economics on Marx's theory is simply intellectually dishonest, or stupid.

If you want to desperately grasp at straws to be edgy and try to somehow mix Marx and BTC, you can appeal to the mythical stateless society to come after the struggle of the revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.

And even then, the overlap with market anarchism continues to be the most natural one.

That's not "right wing" by the way, just like "Austrian" economics is not "Austrian". It's just economics without adjectives.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

d4760b16... 2y ago

We've never had a zero entropy value and storage system so there is no conceptual space for traditional RW ideology (based on low entropy) on a mathematically unique invention that has no compatibility with ANY heterodox economics from the 20th century.

Bitcoin fulfills individualism economics because it assures ownership completely and is time impervious from any decay

Bitcoin fulfills community-ism in that it transmits all individual enhancements of private value into a collective enhancement.

The first bit is commonly called capitalism, the 2nd part is commonly called communism. The point is both systems are now invalid because Bitcoin's fixed denominator math has fused the 2 into a new gestalt

You only understand half of what Bitcoin is. I suggest you drop your ideology and be humble and let the data guide you to conclusion

Am 2y ago

BTC is private property so it can't be communism (based on common property) based on it.

hh 2y ago

Still grasping at straws I see.

The "transmission of individual enhancements of private value" is not "communism", and it doesn't matter how much you contort language and definitions, it has nothing to do with marxism.

The mechanism by which this is achieved is simple and well known - market and voluntarism. When you have these, the aggregation of individual positives is not a zero sum, as it is in communism.

Your maths and "data" are useless in a purely moral and social field like economics.

Am 2y ago

BTC does not contradicts to Marxist theory.

If you do not understand something it doesn't mean it is absurd.

#NoArguments

hh 2y ago

Marxism is inherently opposed to something like a decentralized medium of exchange that enables individual sovereign wealth. That you can reconcile your religion with BTC is not BTC's problem, or mine.

Now get lost or be blocked.

#FuckCommies

Am 2y ago

Marxism is about social production of common goods for consuming, not for exchange at all.

To judge about something you need to know the subject.

hh 2y ago

As I said, get lost.

Guy Swann 2y ago

This guy posts the same comments from multiple accounts and across multiple social media with the same dumb, vapid garbage. After a few comments they will vomit up a long, empty “universal entropy” word salad.

Just block them. Either it’s a bot, or someone who thinks whining at other people to do something is being useful. Given the values they argue it could be either. Regardless, it’s 100% time wasted talking to them. 😁

hh 2y ago