Can a Statist also be a Bitcoin Maxi??
1817 sats \ 77 comments \ @LibertyLuminary 30 Jan 2023 bitcoin
What is your worldview? Do you support coercion, theft, murder, force, etc.? Or, do you support Liberty and the non-aggression principle?
How can an individual proclaim that they are a Bitcoin maximalist, and simultaneously support statism? The two are incompatible with each other.
Consistency matters!
Statement and Purpose of Voluntaryism:
"Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society.
We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy.
Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends."
That is consistent with Bitcoin maximalism!
Disagree? Change me mind!
write
preview
related posts
22 sats \ 1 reply \ @thrown 30 Jan 2023
I think the more important question is how you can advocate for a strict cargo cult ideology and also be in favor of freedom.
Check out Hans Hoppe. It’s about the freedom to choose who you want to associate with. The freedom to trust who you want to trust.
Grouping up and sharing the work among a community is unavoidable because it’s smart. Work smarter, not harder.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
As long as that is chosen by the individual, and not coerced upon him, then no problem.
The principle here is legitimate and uncoerced "Consent."
reply
13 sats \ 11 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jan 2023
Sure. Most statists aren't totalitarians. There are some realms where they want state coercion and others where they don't.
Nightwatchmen minarchists generally support separation of money and state.
reply
10 sats \ 10 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
I reject ALL theft, force, coercion, murder, extorsion, etc., etc... No matter how minimalist someone else may be willing to "accept" it. I do not accept it.
Moreover - Another individual has no natural or legitimate ownership of me. I do not consent to anyone else's claims where I have not willfully contracted with them for any specific goods or services.
It does not matter if the person aggressing against me is a totalitarian, or a so-called minarchist... I DO NOT CONSENT.
reply
31 sats \ 8 replies \ @thrown 30 Jan 2023
I DO NOT CONSENT.
This is what I dislike the most about libertarians. It often comes across as very childish (no offense).
Like screaming into the void “that’s not fair!!”
Sorry, but life is about playing the hand that you’ve been dealt. We can try to improve matters, yes. But it’s not an improvement to get all riled up over stuff that you have no control over.
reply
23 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jan 2023
Amen, I'm a big fan of stoicism for leading a well balanced life.
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Not offended. You can read it in whatever tone you choose. The fact is that I DO NOT CONSENT. That is placing emphasis on the fact of the matter.
Riled up? nearly 20 years of research, application, removal of self-recognized contradictions, sharing with others.... In other words - actual focused effort and specific action.... Nothing about my life screams "that is not fair."
My focus is on exposing statism as the morally bankrupt sacred cow that it is.
You can go right along with taking it up the ass if that is your prerogative.
reply
5 sats \ 5 replies \ @thrown 30 Jan 2023
You can live on Mars like Dr Manhattan (and you probably will if you’re this uncouth in person as well).
I would rather live in community with others. It comes with drama and conflict, yes. But to me, that is what makes life worth living.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
"(and you probably will if you’re this uncouth in person as well)."
Uncouth because I have not engaged your attempts at drawing me into pointless ad hominem baiting? Cute.
reply
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @thrown 30 Jan 2023
Uncouth because I have not engaged your attempts at drawing me into pointless ad hominem baiting?
No, “uncouth” because out of nowhere you spoke of me being sodomized.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Ohhhh... You are one of those people?
"You Can Always Leave" -
"I would rather live in community with others."
I enjoy community as well. [Preferably] one where people reciprocate respect. Pretty basic.
This as opposed to "the drama and conflict," that makes life "so worth living."
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @thrown 30 Jan 2023
I enjoy community as well. [Preferably] one where people reciprocate respect. Pretty basic.
What kind of respect is not being given to you?
Drama and conflict occur even among those that do respect and love each other. That is not “disrespect”, it’s just an unavoidable part of living among other people that have their own will and desires.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
"What kind of respect is not being given to you?"
Compulsory government is all around. Threats of violence, imprisonment, extortion, etc. are too numerous to even waste the time in detailing (which I am sure you know well). Honestly, the question is baffling as the answer is self-evident.
Someone who willfully [initiates] aggression against another are not acting in accordance with so-called unavoidable aspects of life. I reject any assertion that props up, or seeks to legitimize or sanction such an initiation of violence. It is not a mandatory part of human existence to violate ones neighbors.
Yet again... I will emphasize that there is no negation of the world around us. That does not mean that since horrible people exist, that I should embrace being horrible as well because it is some sort of lovely aspect of human existence.
So far - No argument FOR statism has been substantiated. No argument has been given as to why Bitcoin maxi's who support statism, are in any way principally consistent.
reply on another page
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jan 2023
We're definitely aligned on all that, but I don't see how it relates to the question.
reply
3 sats \ 30 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
Yes, because bitcoin maximalism is a flawed ideology that contradicts itself constantly. just look at the "maxis" arguing to censor ordinals even though they don't break any consensus rules
reply
3 sats \ 10 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jan 2023
I would say that those people simply are not Bitcoiners.
But I agree with you that we are being submarined. Republicans trying to pass off as liberterians. Conservatives masquerading as Bitcoiners.
In the end they always reveal their authoritarian faces. They want to censor transactions which is against FREEDOM. They want to close borders which ist against FREEDOM. They want to opress lgbtq people which is against personal FREEDOM. They want the government to regulate drugs which is against FREEDOM.
reply
0 sats \ 9 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
Not bitcoiners, eh? https://twitter.com/udiWertheimer/status/1619780147779092482
reply
5 sats \ 8 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jan 2023
Yes. Individuals can do whatever they want. Miners can make blocks with whatever they want.
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
so when they do it to censor ordinals transactions it's fine? but when jihan wu was doing it to raise fees with empty blocks to incentivize people to use bcash it wasn't fine?
reply
10 sats \ 6 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jan 2023
so when they do it to censor ordinals transactions it's fine?
Yes. Everyone is free to do whatever they want.
but when jihan wu was doing it to raise fees with empty blocks to incentivize people to use bcash it wasn't fine?
It was fine. Of course it was. Everyone can do whatever they want. Bitcoin is made in a way that incentivizes itself instead of forcing it with an authoritarian central party.
I think you don't get it yet.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
Lol, you said people arguing to censor ordinals are not real bitcoiners, I showed you adam back making the argument to censor ordinals, and now you're saying I don't get it, hahahaha. More maximalism larping
reply
25 sats \ 4 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jan 2023
Nah, it's actually very easy: Everyone can do whatever they want.
That's it. That's all. If a miner wants to censor he can do so. If other people don't want to build on top of these blocks they can do so. If other people refuse to build on the blocks they can do so too. Where is the problem?
view replies
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
@demitasse - Do you support statism? Do you find statism to be a "sound ideology," free of contradictions?
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
No, I am an anarchist for the most part. I believe in freedom, and statism isn't compatible with this. I think minarchism is for freedom larpers
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Thank you for the response.
When you say "for the most part," what do you mean by that? What is the other part?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
Well, I try to live as free as possible but I still exist in a statist world, so there is stuff I need to do that I don't agree with just to live and minimize hostile state interactions, like having a driver's license for example. I think it is a bunch of bullshit to have to have one, but I also don't want to go to jail for driving without one. I am an anarchist who is trying to free myself and working towards this goal but I am not free yet, if that makes sense
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
The choice between the lesser of predations is no choice at all.
An analogy could be: A woman who is told by her rapist to be still or he will kill her after raping her, is not therefore consenting to being raped just because she prefers to live more than resisting.
Recall the original question - "Can a Statist also be a Bitcoin Maxi??"
The answer = NO.
Just like a theist cannot simultaneously be a non-theist.
The intent of this thread is not to cause shitcoiners to battle with Bitcoin maxi's. The intent of the thread is to encourage some meaningful dialogue/debate with self-professing Bitcoin maxi's who also WILLFULLY engage in the propagation of statism.
This is NOT a debate about whether or not Bitcoin is better than shitcoins. This is about whether someone who claims to be aligned with the PRINCIPLES of Bitcoin maximalism, can honestly make such a claim if they are also a supporter of statism, since statism is in conflict with the principles of Bitcoin maximalism.
If someone disagrees with that, let's hear it!
For those who do agree, but you find yourself lining up to vote, or even pushing for state sanctioned Bitcoin adoption (ouch!).... Choose your premise!
This does not mean we ought to reject where oppression is reduced and instead wish for more oppression. Not at all!. But we should not act like damn cheerleaders for those who wish to rule us, when they pretend to be benevolent by reducing their oppression.
The man who is proudly certain of his self-ownership, will respect his fellow man in the same manner that he wishes to be respected (NAP). He will also REFUSE to play the game of would-be rulers, to include all which is tied to any presumed sanction or legitimization of the scheme which seeks to strip him of his individual sovereignty.
I am speaking to the maxi's who do not understand this.
Choose a principled and consistent path toward Liberty. Such is impossible for the statist.
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Eximpius 30 Jan 2023
projection
reply
1 sat \ 4 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Does an ideology create itself? Or do inconsistent individuals act as pretenders and thus confuse others from the true merits?
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
maximalism has harmed bitcoin more than helped it with maximalists becoming close minded and emotional rather than addressing very real conversations about weaknesses limitations and attack vectors in bitcoin
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
sell all your sats and stick with your shitcoins
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
also, your sad tantrum is confirming what i am saying, instead of addressing the inconvenient facts you'd rather throw a childish tantrum and resort to calling me names.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
the only sats I have are to use lightning, I don't hold any other sats except in my channels so i can use stuff like fountain and stacker, I have sold all my sats for monero because it is better cypherpunk money
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
donate monero...
LOL such a shitcoiner
reply
100 sats \ 6 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
Yeah, privacy by default is a much better tradeoff than opt in privacy. coinjoins are a weak opt in privacy no different than zcash's private transactions. nobody uses them and the anonymity set is worthless. lightning isn't private. the dark web isn't using lightning and is actively advising that nobody should ever use bitcoin. if you don't see a problem with cypherpunks avoiding your precious transparent chain cypherpunk money then you are the problem
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
cringe meme. show me just one dark web user who uses lightning for illegal activity. show me a ransomware that requests a lightning payment. until you can do either, your memes are just cringe
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
lightning isn't private.
Right there shows how few you know about Bitcoin...
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
nobody on the dark web who is avoiding law enforcement cares about your opinion, this is the reality. you are not actually making a counter argument to the fact that the dark web isn't using lightning. you are having an emotional outburst because I don't care about your opinion
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
dark web
LOL live into the light not into the darkness... Debating with shitcoiners is totally useless.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @demitasse 30 Jan 2023
sorry if you don't like it, but that is the real world test and proving grounds for the technology. LOL at bitcoiners who pretend like the dark web isn't important for bitcoin. I guess fully aml/kyc'd regulated and taxed "censorship resistance" is what you think bitcoin is? hahaha it's laughable how bad maxi's larp
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jan 2023
No, Statism and being a Bitcoiner is incompatible. <removed because I missread>
reply
1 sat \ 5 replies \ @gd 30 Jan 2023
What you are and what you believe are for you to decide. Others can label or perceive you as they like, it makes no difference.
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
It makes a difference when they label themselves or their pretend "representatives" as rulers over your existence.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @gd 30 Jan 2023
Their labels don’t represent truth, unless you decide to abide by them. At this point, it is you who is appointing your own ruler over your existence.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Very well said. Yet they still proceed with supporting what they think is rooted in Liberty, which in fact is not.
The goal here is to expose the incompatibility of statism and Liberty.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @gd 30 Jan 2023
And after you expose it, you’ll have a better, happier or more fulfilled life? Your own liberty will be enhanced?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 31 Jan 2023
Absolutely! Liberty is gained by inches. The power that statist want to retain is very enticing to them, and they do not give in to dissenters easily.
Counter-Economics, teaching my own children, sharing with people like you, here, and leveraging the modern day technological tools available to us... Yes. Liberty is enhanced! Both personally and broadly. It is enhanced when people begin to think without blinders and cognitive dissonance. Then technologies such as that provided by Bitcoin, become remarkable tools toward gaining incremental individual Liberty. By arming oneself, and others with TRUTH. Awareness of truth can be very liberating as it frees the minds of people who may have felt powerless and incapable of taking steps toward their own freedom.
While I have plenty of misgivings about many of the myths surrounding the so-called American "founding fathers..." Consider the following quote:
Excerpt from Samuel Adams' Speech at the Philadelphia State House - August 1, 1776
"Our forefathers, 'tis said, consented to be subject to the laws of Great Britain. I will not, at present, dispute it, nor mark out the limits and conditions of their submission: but will it be denied that they contracted to pay obedience, and to be under the control of Great Britain, because it appeared to them most beneficial in their then present circumstances and situations? We, my countrymen, have the same right to consult and provide for our happiness, which they had to promote theirs. If they had a view to posterity in their contracts, it must have been to advance the felicity of their descendants. If they erred in their expectations and prospects, we can never be condemned for a conduct which they would have recommended had they foreseen our present condition."
Likewise - I have the same ability to consult and provide for MY happiness as they had to promote theirs.
reply
1 sat \ 19 replies \ @monk_cactus 30 Jan 2023
Who is going to enforce your property claims (real estate, for example), if not a state?
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
https://cdn.mises.org/The%20Philosophy%20of%20Ownership_2.pdf
The Philosophy of Ownership - Robert LeFevre
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @monk_cactus 30 Jan 2023
How does a single sentence question merit a book response?
You can't answer my question in one sentence?
reply
0 sats \ 16 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
What exist first? The state or the property?
reply
1 sat \ 15 replies \ @monk_cactus 30 Jan 2023
How is that relevant? I would say the property, as an abstraction, exists independently of a state
reply
0 sats \ 14 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
Then why do you need a state to enforce a property? Who is this "state"? Is the state part of the contract? Who is giving the authority to a "state"?
reply
1 sat \ 13 replies \ @monk_cactus 30 Jan 2023
Because there exists people who will try rob me of that property.
If your answer is protect it yourself, I would say you're not anti-state, you're actually just pro-mafia.
reply
0 sats \ 12 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
hahaha so you really think the state will protect you. LOLOLOL The state will the first one to rob you, not others.
reply
1 sat \ 11 replies \ @monk_cactus 30 Jan 2023
Exactly. You pay one mafia or another, but in a large enough society this is inevitable.
reply
0 sats \ 10 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Only inevitable for those who refuse to choose Liberty and small, localized voluntary associations, rather than cave to any mafia (no matter how large or small).
view replies
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @TheL0wner 30 Jan 2023
only communists insist that money and government must be linked.
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 30 Jan 2023
More you know about Bitcoin will push you more into knowing what is liberty and be a sovereign individual.
Automatically, even if you are a communist/statist deep inside or brainwashed, slowly you will leave that stage and move into Bitcoin maximalism.
When you reach a level of Bitcoin maximalism that cannot go back you realize that all your life (of statist) was a fucking lie and your fight for freedom will became even stronger.
All those denying bitcoin maximalism are:
  • noobs that still don't know too much about Bitcoin
  • clueless shitcoiners
  • bitcoin haters
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @PROTOPHREAK 30 Jan 2023
Probably so. I think people assign their idea of economic systems to Bitcoin but ultimately Bitcoin is unique and distinct from any economic system we have come up with to date. It is only a tool and you can use it to shape humanity however you want. If anyone assigns anything more specific to it than that then they are projecting.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @m00ninite 30 Jan 2023
Yes, because labels are imaginary. Nobody can even agree on what a statist or a maxi is.
People are a little more complex than aligning themselves to a single ideology (or they should be).
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertyLuminary OP 30 Jan 2023
Yes... And some people are content to align with no stated principles whatsoever.
reply