Bitcoin and the philosophy of free choice

The depth of philosophy is generally measured in extremities and diversions from an included central point. It can be directed to collective thought, or to the individual, when discussing knowledge and experiences with the intention of developing a grandiose understanding of the subject in question, or of posing real and lasting change. The roadmap for such a study is as follows: First, we define the problem of a system. Second, we define a solution for the system. Third, we are implementing the solution that allows us to enter a new system. In following this path, we must first define our understood focal point, or problem.

The problem is the money

This isn’t your typical “digital gold” conversation, we’re going to get out of that box for now. Regardless of their political alignment, everyone can basically agree that the system is down. But what “system” are we talking about? A system can be anything, from the things you prepare yourself in the morning to the machines used to deepen our understanding of quantum physics.

Do we mean the financial system? Of course, that plays a role. With non-stop inflation, growing quantitative easing, repo rates reaching levels never seen before, finance is certainly having something to do with it. Covid-19 vaccine response unless your taste? Public education response to a global pandemic that is not conducive to your desires? Has the rent moratorium only succeeded in delaying the frozen interest debt? Has Job never called you back when you weren’t considered essential? Does the absence of Social Security for your retirement pose existential questions about the demands placed on your income? Maybe it’s just the fact that you can’t stand needing a license for every “freedom” you think you have. Well, who controls all of this?

The problem is the state

It is not a manifesto for anarchism, although I am getting closer to it every day. The problem is, the state has let us down. Financially, bureaucratically, generally and fully, the state has failed us. The reason for this failure is the incentive. The incentive to serve the majority people in the system has evaporated and the majority has amassed far less wealth than the minority, and the minority reigns supreme. Legislation is developed under the heavy weight of cash.

In a fiduciary standard, the answer is always more: more impressions, more bailouts, more tax cuts, more quantitative easing, more headlines, more taxes, more, more and more. In a debt ecosystem, we’re just going to raise the ceiling.

If the system is the state and the decree feeds the system by allowing the minority to ignore the majority for lack of votes in the existing system, then quit the system. This brings us to the solution.

The solution is to leave the state

Easier said than done, right? Not anymore. It’s not as simple as “if you don’t like it, go”. Leaving the state, or leaving the existing system, does not imply or encourage the complete annulment of the state. Leaving the state simply means choosing to opt out of the system designed against you and opting for a system designed for you.

In a previous article, I explained how “Fiat Is The State” and “Bitcoin Is Stateless”. Without repeating what any of these statements mean, let’s just assume they’re true. Fiat currencies are beholden to their states, and bitcoin is not beholden to anyone, it is “stateless”.

Theoretically, if our problem is the state and the antithesis of the state is anti-state, or “stateless”, then Bitcoin is the logical solution to the existing problem because it allows you to leave the current system using its network. to exit the given system of your state.

Buying bitcoin is not enough to fix the system, it just allows individual gratification to successfully come out of a system against you, and that is only if one follows the path of sovereignty over one’s own wealth, like the purchase of a part does not constitute a complete outing. How then do we accomplish this for the collective rather than the individual? How to implement sovereignty?

Implement a sovereignty solution

This piece is not a technical walkthrough such as setting up a node or explaining how wallets work. Instead, we will focus on a solution for the collective rather than the individual. How to achieve a collective exit from the current system? One person at a time.

The first premise must be understood. There is a problem, and that problem is the state. Bitcoin allows individuals to operate outside the bounds of any surrounding state (read this article earlier if you still haven’t), making Bitcoin the solution or the exit of a system. To implement system exit, you must first be able to actually exit the system. Most people aren’t quite capable of fully exiting the system yet, and that’s okay. We don’t need to do it all; we may not even need to do everything. We just have to be willing to do it if we need to. What does getting out of the system mean?

Bitcoin operates as a global currency, supported by efforts to maintain the network by nodes and miners. Nodes are basically people with a computer that validates transactions. Miners actually solve the encryption used by Bitcoin by spending electricity. This expenditure of tangible resources makes it possible to associate a value according to the resources spent. This system exists outside the state, as the state has no power over the protocol. The state cannot decide to create more bitcoins, only a consensus of the network can do it. The state cannot hide transactions because Bitcoin is a public ledger that holds everyone accountable. Any node can verify any transaction that has already occurred. To own your own coins, to take the step of sovereignty and to take control of your own coins with auto-guard, and to be able to operate with fungible currency anywhere in the world, it is… to leave the system.

Once a sufficient number of individuals have taken their exit from the system, not by completely abandoning it, or by leaving it, but by the possession of a new asset, they can now exist outside the state. . Now, a person, a coin, a wallet, may not be the state’s biggest concern. However, if 30, or 40% or more of the citizens were capable of an exit, or threatening an exit, then maybe the state is ready to listen. Maybe in order to get that new asset that you hold in a system that they can’t access, they make you more into wanting to re-enroll with some rewards of some sort. Perhaps it is a restructuring of the whole system, and perhaps the old way is thrown into the dark pits of human failure, written in scholarly texts of the future, telling a time lost and dispersed.

To put it briefly, exit the system together and put them to work to get you back. Once this is done, we move on to the last ideal in this pursuit of sovereignty. The system must now be replaced, but with what?

The state of the network in relation to a state of the network

These are two separate ideals that represent completely different ideologies. One of them is now, and in almost everything we do, while the other is in the not-so-distant future.

“A Network State” is something that was popularized by Balaji Srinivasan. He argues that the collective bargaining power of like-minded individuals who are willing to leave the system can control a well-weighted opinion that is hard to ignore. He talks about the possibilities for these cast collectives to gain statehood, pool assets, buy properties, and create their own virtual and physical communities inside or outside of states. -specific nations.

“The state of the network” is quite another thing. This is the nomenclature of collective consensus: the ideas that permeate each individual who comes out of the current system. Once a Bitcoiner becomes a Bitcoiner, he then enters the collective consensus, or “The National Bitcoin State” (if you will).

The “Network State” allows for collective reflection and continued growth of ideals as well as countless other benefits. “A network state” is the manifestation of a digital community recognized in an official capacity. “Network state” is not a requirement, but it is most certainly the path we are on. “Network State” is imperative, if not essential, for future adoption.

“A Network State” should arise from those who belong to “The Network State”. But being part of “The Network State” does not require admission into “A Network State”. Read it again.

This choice is inherent and undoubtedly dogmatic in Bitcoin. A requirement for entering a network state after exiting the existing system is against the ideology of freedom deeply rooted in protocol. Entering the system from a network state requires the absolute liberation of the previous system, but also requires the absence of any system.

The abandonment of the original system and the absence of the need for a new system is what gives an individual real choice in adopting a new system. With no choice, you were simply forced to upgrade your analog system to a digital system.

This is a guest article by Shawn Amick. The opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.


Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *