Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

Sometimes people ask me, “what if American bans bitcoin like they did for gold?”

1) That’s why it’s useful to engage politically. To prevent that draconian tail risk. And it’s working. Prevent any sort of anti-Bitcoin supermajority.

2) America had a supermajority in Congress when they did that for gold. They could override every check on power. That’s uncommon. We became highly collectivist for a period of time.

3) America literally put Japanese Americans in camps back then. But not German Americans. Because we were outright racist. And this was all pre civil rights for Black Americans too. Terrible.

4) This was all pre-internet. Centralized media. Few memes. The slow speed of communication was relevant.

The meme-work makes the dream work.
3d
sms 1y ago

The War of Drugs, the War of Terror have been incredibly useful and lucrative scams for all gangsterments worldwide.

With #Bitcoin, they stopped the war on it once there was sufficient infrastructure to coopt Bitcoin's original purpose through chainalysis, taxes, KYC onramps, futures/options, ETFs, et cetera.

Until that was in place, the WARshington gangsterment did all they could to subvert Bitcoin through various 3 letter gangs #SEC, #FED, #IRS, #DOJ, et cetera.

If that were not effective in coopting and looting Bitcoin, they would have banned it and declared a lucrative and formal War on Bitcoin, regardless of "voter" opposition to that.

Most Americans tried cannabis at some point in their lives, yet their owners in WARshington still banned it for generations - despite opposing political engagement - and ruined millions of lives in the process.

So, political engagement for Bitcoin is overrated; as usual, it mostly benefits lobby organisations, which is a well known and proven lucrative business in the District of Criminals.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

3d
sms 1y ago

Likewise, "checks and balances on powers" within the #US system have always been mythology.

The proof is in the constant efforts to "pack" the SCOTUS with judges that shall declare unconstitutional laws constitutional.

On anything affecting them, it's always the gangsterment sitting in judgment of itself: 🙃

"what could possibly go wrong?!"👮🕵😂

Don't forget that it's the same gang that declared that there are legal and humane ways to TORTURE people!😂

That was far more recent than FDR crimes, for which no members of their gangsterment were punished in any way in either era!

Anything the uniparty members can't monetise for their gangsterment - much less any existential threat like Bitcoin - they simply change the law to marginalise or ban, regardless of their phoney constitution and "checks and balances" charade.