Introduction - History doesn't repeat itself, but it may rhyme.

Executive Order 6102 was signed on April 5th, 1933 by President Roosevelt in the United States. This order made it mostly illegal to own gold. It's interesting, and I think instructive, to see what was being published in newspapers at this time. So I did some research, and compiled some of what I found. This is not an exhaustive search by a historian, just me poking around for a while, going down a few rabbit holes.
Before this executive order was signed, most mentions of gold "hoarding" referred to countries. France, in particular, was a "hoarder" of gold. France Hoards Gold; Sees War Metal Piles Up in Vaults Despite Warning That Commerce Is Menaced.,738980&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q=gold%20hoarding
But after executive order 6102, it wasn't countries like France that were being called hoarders. It was US citizens, who wanted to keep their gold coins. And by and large, in what I've found there was almost 100% complete approval of the order, and condemnation of those who defied it. That was shocking. I didn't find editorials or anything in newspapers saying that this was an unjustified expansion of government authority. Maybe it's the word "emergency" that was thrown around so much, that clouded people's minds.
Also surprising is the way words are redefined, and the good is twisted into the bad. Instead of praise for a thrifty person who saves in the best money available, these people were labeled "gold hoarders", and accused of "contributing to the current crisis" (in other words, the Depression).
Here's some extracts from newspapers and magazines of the era.

Hoarders of Gold Warned to Deposit It By Monday - Feb 27, 1933

Gazette and Bulletin
The federal government is going after the gold hoarder. It plans to compel them to return the gold which they took out of the nation's banks in the series of gold raids which, together with foreign gold raids, precipitated the nation-wide banking crisis. The gold raiders have been given until March 11—next Monday—to come forward voluntarily and return to the bank the hoarded yellow metal. Unless they do so, Uncle Bam will take such steps as are available under the Federal Trading With The Enemy Act to make the gold hoarders behave.

Government plans to publish names of gold hoarders - March 9, 1933

Victoria Advocate (Victoria, Texas)
Publication of the names of the principal gold hoarders in the United States was discussed in New York banking circles as a means of lifting the present so-called “Midas moratorium." It is known that since 1915 the Federal Reserve Bank here has been recording the names of persons who withdrew gold in any sizeable amounts. Through cooperation of the banks, the government, therefore, is in possession of all the facts and figures pertaining to the huge quantities coins and metal now reposing in the vaults of the country. In some quarters it has been suggested a progressive tax on sequestered gold be imposed.,1482449&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjLueXk-t-BAxVrJkQIHZyvDGkQ6AF6BAgMEAI#v=onepage&q=Publication%20of%20the%20names%20of%20the%20principal%20gold%20hoarders%20victoria%20advocate&f=false

Yellow Metal Flowing Back to Coffers of Nation - March 10, 1933

Lewiston Morning Tribune
Some Are Depositing it, Others Take Bank Currency In Return For Their Contribution to Nation's Safety. Golden treasures, after playing truant on a hoarding holiday, crept back to the secure vaults of the federal reserve bank here today. Beginning Monday, it was unofficially estimated that close to $50,000.000 in gold coin and gold certificates had been received by the central bank from member institutions or persons, either conscience-stricken or fearing public exposure and confiscatory taxation, who felt that paper currency was the safer.,3369832&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEidSz5t-BAxV1I0QIHVc2AggQ6AF6BAgLEAI#v=onepage&q=gold%20hoarders&f=true

Federal Reserve Widens Hunt for Hoarders; Asks Names in Gold Withdrawals for 2 Years - March 10, 1933

New York Times WASHINGTON, March 9.—In. its effort to learn the identity of the gold hoarders of the country, the Federal Reserve Board today broadened the scope of its order for reports from member banks to cover withdrawals of gold in the past two years. Originally the board's order to the Reserve banks and their members, issued last night, asked for a report only on payments of gold by Reserve and member banks after Feb. 1 and ordering its return by March 13. The use to be made of the names of hoarders to be obtained in this report has not been disclosed, but the compilation will put Federal officials in a position either to make public the names or use them for more drastic action. Under President Roosevelt's proclamation, the withdrawal of gold for hoarding or other purposes was prohibited. Before the issuance of the President's proclamation, however, millions of dollars worth of gold was withdrawn and is now in private hoarding. Some officials have suggested that a tax be imposed on hoarded gold. Whatever use the Reserve Board intends to make of the names of gold hoarders, the primary desire of the new administration is to force as much gold as possible out of hoarding and back into the vaults of the Federal Reserve System. The orders issued yesterday and today are expected to have this effect and it is believed that the fear of publicity will drive considerable gold out of safe deposit boxes and other places of concealment.

America : A Catholic Review of the Week 1933-03-25

(This is the only article I found that had the slightest whiff of skepticism about the executive order)
In itself gold hoarding is neither necessarily wrong, morally, nor was it illegal before March 9. It may at times serve a useful purpose, and we quite agree with R. W. Robey, financial editor of the New York Evening Post, that it should not be permanently forbidden. As Mr. Robey observes, the right of the public to withdraw its money from the banks to keep it under the hearthstone, is one way, and a most effective way, of warning the Government and the banks that unsafe and corrupt banking practices must be stopped. But people will not hoard gold, or any kind of currency, when they know that their money is not being risked on wild-cat financial schemes. No doubt, the banking reorganization proposed by Mr. Roosevelt is absolutely necessary. It ought to be adopted for the simple reason that good banking laws, fearlessly enforced, create banks on which the public can rely, and so sustain that public confidence which is of far more importance to the banks and to all financial agencies than money.

Start On Trail Of Hidden Gold - June 6, 1933

St Joseph Gazette Names of 1000 suspected hoarders turned over to U.S. Agents The names of more than 1,000 persons suspected of gold hoarding were put into the hands of department of Justice agents tonight with orders to ferret them out and find out where their gold is being stored. Attorney General Cummings today gave the agents the names of 1000 persons the department believes have more gold than the $100 limit set by President Roosevelt. "I think that those people who are holding their gold against their government are falling in their patriotic duly." the attorney general said. "If there is anything needed at this time to return our country to a condition of prosperity it is the wholehearted co-operation of the people with the efforts of the administration.,4554095&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj927SZk9CBAxXALEQIHSNECXwQ6AF6BAgNEAI#v=onepage&q=gold%20hoarding&f=false

GOLD: The first steps to be taken against the gold hoarders will be equivalent to a slap on the wrist - June 12, 1933

The Times Daily (Florence, Alabama, US), June 12 1933
GOLD: The first steps to be taken against the gold hoarders will be equivalent to a slap on the wrist. The hoarding brethren will be asked whether they have the gold and won't they please give it back. If the government hopes to avoid a showdown by this system it is in for a disappointment. The fact is that several large hoarders actually believe they have the government on the run. They claim they will battle any legal action right up to the supreme court, on constitutional grounds. They may change their minds if the public reaction the the publication of their names - which is probably within a month - is sufficiently sharp.


The Atlanta Constitution
Refusal of 183 persons to return $1,148,945 of gold and gold certificates to the government today gave rise to indication that the department of justice shortly would begin prosecution of one or more of them. The department announced that its agents, in interviewing persons known to have withdrawn gold prior to the nation-wide bank holiday of last march had found nearly 200 who had turned down a formal request to turn in the metal.
Previously Attorney-General Cummings had stated that in contacting persons suspected of hoarding gold his agents were directed first to call their attention to the law requiring the metal to be turned over to the government and then to ask that the law be obeyed. He declared that when the time came to prosecute he did not want the person charged with gold hoarding to claim ignorance of the law.
Although there was no official statement today that prosecution of the hoarders was imminent, Cummings and Secretary Woodin previously had said an example would be made of persons deliberately holding gold to the harm of their country.
The statement by the department today said that 3,011 persons had been interviewed and 160 of them had returned $285,894 of gold or gold certificates at the request of the federal agents. It added that 2,668 persons reported they had returned $19,591,467 of gold since the president barred its use as currency in this country.
The agents have verified the return of $14,838,408 by 1,763 persons, but have not completed checking the stories told by 905 persons who are supposed to have held back $4,753,065.

HOLDER OF $120,000 IN GOLD DEFIES U.S. - Jun 21, 1933

Reading Eagle Philadelphia, June 21 President Roosevelt and the United States government have been openly defied by a Philadelphia gold hoarder, described by federal investigators as a “textile manufacturer, whose name may be disclosed later.” The manufacturer is supposed to have $120,000 in gold coins cached in safety deposit boxes. Agents for the United States Bureau of Investigation interviewed the gold owner yesterday. They explained all gold must be turned into the United States Treasury under a Presidential decree. But they reported back to headquarters that the threat of “pitiless publicity for hoarders” left the manufacturer unmoved. The agents said they would await further orders from Attorney General Homer S. Cummings.
(is this story true? who knows) HOARDER RETURNS $120,000 IN GOLD - Jun 23, 1933 Warsaw Union Philadelphia, June 23. This city’s largest known gold hoarder, described by federal investigators as “a wealthy textile manufacturer,” on Thursday turned back $120,000 in gold coins to a bank. Agents for the United States Department of Justice disclosed the action after threatening to reveal the hoarder’s name.,7491086&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiC4YSbtN-BAxUYPUQIHbcJBKYQ6AF6BAgFEAI#v=onepage&q=textile%20manufacturer%20gold%20hoarder&f=false

The Daily Washington Merry-Go-Round - As To Hoarding - 1933-06-30

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
CONFIDENTIALLY, the Government is in no hurry for a court fight on the anti-gold hoarding legislation. It is going to exhaust every resource of “moral persuasion” before it resorts to actual legal proceedings against offenders. For two reasons: First, there is serious doubt among Department of Justice attorneys as to the constitutionality of the act. They are confident that on the plea of patriotism they can obtain a jury conviction. But they are extremely dubious as to the attitude of the higher courts. Second, the Government has no means of forcing the disgorging of hoarded gold, even should it secure final conviction. The Government cannot forcibly take away gold. It can send the culprit to jail, and fine him. But beyond that it can not go. These actualities explain why no court action has yet been instituted, and why none is likely to be in the near future. The Government’s policy is to bring pressure to bear by publicity and to try to compel voluntary disgorging. The next step in this strategy will be the publication of the names of recalcitrant hoarders.

Laughs, Tears and Whispers as Uncle Sam's sleuths Chased It : Hidden Gold - First Facts on how they found it in Vaults, Mattresses and Socks - Aug 5, 1933

The Spokesman-Review
In One Slum Flat on New York's Lower East Side, an Agent Confronted a Woman Who, in Spite of Her Tattered Appearance, Finally Revealed $2,000 in Gold Under A Mattress!
One "Embarrassing Moment" When a Federal Agent Seeking Gold Hoard, Interviewed a Woman Whose Husband Didn't Know She Had $1,200 Hidden. She Begged For Secrecy - the Agent Consented.

Where Is That Gold? Says Uncle Sam: Criminal Prosecution of Hoarders Is About to Be Started By The Department Of Justice - Sep 23, 1933

The Deseret News
"One hoarder finally surrendered to the persistent questioning of a Justice Department agent and removed $500 in gold from an old grandfather’s clock for bank deposit"
The same exact article shows up in another newspaper as well, and probably more. Here's another, from the St Joseph Gazette, St. Joseph, Missouri,4275759&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiIxuSdssiBAxVbO0QIHWVZDt0Q6AF6BAhjEAI#v=onepage&q=%22gold%20hoarding%22&f=false

Indicted as gold hoarder, attorney attacks order - September 27, 1933

Reading Eagle, Reading Pennsylvania Frederic Barber Campbell, attorney, who filed suit to test the constitutionality of President Roosevelt's orders against gold hoarding, was indicted by a federal grand jury on a charge of hoarding gold. Federal authorities here said that the indictment today made him the first defendant in a prosecution involving the gold hoarding act and executive order. The indictment charged him with hoarding gold in violation of an act of Congress and the executive order of the President of Aug. 28, last.,4229106&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiIxuSdssiBAxVbO0QIHWVZDt0Q6AF6BAgHEAI

Gold Hoarders, Caught in Government Trap, Find Selves on Spot Oct 8, 1933

The Pittsburgh Press
The fellow who had a hoard of gold and refused to turn it back to the Treasury thought he had a good joke on his helpless old Uncle Sam. While people with tender consciences were rushing back their hoards, both great and small, there were a few hard-boiled ones who thumbed derisive noses at the government and said, “come and get it if you can.” When nothing happened, neither seizure nor prosecution, people began to ask if the government had the right to take away the gold a citizen owned: if in the end there was anything the government could do about it. Was the hoarder just having a good joke on Uncle Sam after all? Now it appears that since last spring, instead of being embarrassed, Uncle Sam has just been feigning embarrassment, while he was cunningly reeling out enough rope to the hoarder for the latter to hang himself. An examination of the executive orders signed by President Roosevelt Aug. 28 and 29 would indicate that Uncle Sam is now set

Woman in Gold Hoarding Freed, Case Dismissed on Return of Metal to Trade. October 28, 1933

The Washington Post Woman in Gold Hoarding Freed, Case Dismissed on Return of Metal to Trade. United States Commissioner Samuel F. Collins today dismissed charges of gold hoarding against Mrs. Effie L. Martin, accused of withholding $85,000 in gold and gold certificates. “After conferring with the Attorney General in Washington and United States Attorneys Pierson Hall and H. H. McPike, it appears this complaint has served its purpose and the hoarded gold has been restored to the channels of trade,” said Jack L. Powell, assistant United States attorney, moving for dismissal.

Progress Claimed Against Hoarders - November 24, 1933

$428,000 Gold Given Up; 9 Indictments Pending. The Washington Post
Progress in the Government's drive against gold hoarding was reported yesterday when Attorney General Homer Cummings said there were nine indictments pending against known hoarders and $39,329,573 had been turned in to the Treasury. Between September 28 and November 22, approximately $428,000 in gold. or -certificates was surrendered. A total of $240,130 has been turned in since prosecutions started. Five pending indictments are in New York. Two are in New Jersey and two in Massachusetts. Twelve complaints have been filed in California, Wisconsin and Oklahoma. The exact amount of gold still outstanding is not known, Cummings said.

Shreveporter Refuses to Tell Where $2,500 in Coin Is Hidden - March 28, 1934

Hope Star (1934-03-28) (Hope, Arkansas) Shreveporter Refuses to Tell Where $2,500 in Coin Is Hidden Shreveport's first arrest for alleged gold hoarding, and one of the few thus far in the nation, was made here Tuesday when a deputy United States marshal served a warrant on Mrs. Mary Blanchard, charging her with hoarding $2.500 in gold coin. Mrs. Blanchard, wife of A. G. Blanchard. oil appliance dealer, appeared two hours later in the office of United States Commissioner T. Overton Brooks and arranged $3.000 bond. The temporary bond is returnable.

Welcome Death Comes at Last To Colorful Colorado Leader - June 25, 1934

The Atlanta Constitution
Charles S. Thomas, 84, who capped a stormy career as United States senator and governor of Colorado by defying President Roosevelt’s 1933 order against gold hoarding, died today. Thomas’ life had been ebbing for weeks, and many times he had ex- pressed his willingness to die. Once he pushed away a meal set before him by his daughter, Miss Edith Thomas, and said: “Why should I eat? I am ready to die.” Though a democrat all his life, Thomas frequently clashed with leaders of his party. He termed “undemocratic” the powers given Franklin D. Roosevelt as president and in the Wilson administration opposed the United States’ participation in the League of Nations and Versailles treaty. He had retired from active political life last year when the president in 1871 called for the surrender of gold to the treasury, in connection with the national banking crisis. Thomas acquired more gold than the law allowed, and defied the government to seize his “hoard” of $120. “I have qualified for the penitentiary and am at your service,” he wrote the prosecuting authorities. His “hoard” was ignored, but later his daughter was indicted for gold hoarding, and Thomas announced he would help defend her on the ground that the order deprived citizens of their property without due process of law, and therefore was unconstitutional. This case is pending.

Conclusions and takeaways

It's interesting to speculate about what may happen to bitcoin owners in the future, based on what happened to gold owners in the past. Here's a few ideas.
There may be a time in the future where we will be required to register bitcoin ownership, especially "unhosted wallets" (i.e. bitcoin not on an exchange). Likely we will also be requested to provide public keys for all bitcoin we own.
Terminology will be changed. "Self Custody" isn't the word that will be used, because it sounds positive. They'll go for something like unhosted wallet, as we've already seen in the EU. Self custody may be illegal.
"Making an example" of people will be a big thing.
"It's an Emergency" will also be big. We've already seen that word "emergency" tossed around, it excuses any and all government overreach for many people.
People are very susceptible to propaganda. As mentioned in the intro, I was very surprised that I didn't find articles and editorials condemning this government action.
I did NOT see any articles about people actually being imprisoned over gold ownership. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, but I didn't find anything in the newspapers of that era.
My biggest take-away here is this: Privacy and non-KYC bitcoin is more important than you think.
It's not about privacy, it's about knowing how to exercise your rights. The order applies only to persons, not to living men. You either govern yourself or someone else will.
Certainly possible but very hard to enforce due to the nature of bitcoin. If this happens the best course of action would be to leave. Which you'd need to prepare to do ahead of time. Plenty of nations would be happy to accept expats with stacks. The US could get this desperate but if they do its gonna cease being a place I'd live. I'd get my family out.
Great website.
"Increasing ISP surveillance" - bip 324 (opportunistic node to node encryption) was just merged in, which will help this.
Now you can just move to another country easily part of that nobody can know how much corn you really have and how to get it if in self custody (that is why it is important) and old times nobody went door to door to confiscate gold even, it was only the one that was already kept in the banks that was (easily) confiscated, not that individuals hodled at hand
Great post and really appreciate all the research you did.
Agree with most of your points. "The People" are not to be relied upon as a guard against government intrusion. We can be sure that if Bitcoin becomes an important commercial asset that people without Bitcoin (the many) will be hostile to the people with Bitcoin (the few), and will be supportive of confiscation and more.
The good thing is that Bitcoin is easier to hide and harder to confiscate than gold. Use good privacy practices and accumulate non-kyc Bitcoin if you can, and protect yourself and your stack.
I have mostly kyc Bitcoin, this sucks.
Americans mostly handed their gold in voluntarily as an act of patriotism. There weren't any confiscations of individual gold, prosecutions were rare, and imprisonment almost non-existent. It lead to the big thing, which was the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 which dealt with removing the title of gold certificates (paper gold) from private persons and institutions. The Act and Order weren't repealed until 1964 and 1974 respectively, when Americans could legally hold gold (for investment purposes). Gold hoarders weren't particularly liked amongst the public at large because of who they were, and how they talked, especially coming out of the economic crisis, with widespread poverty. I hope bitcoiners and the branding culture take note.
How do you suggest that a gold "hoarder" should have been, talked and conducted himself to be liked? How should bitcoiners conduct themselves and what notes need to be taken for the branding culture? Can you please elaborate?
Roosevelt (a Democrat) beat Hoover (a Republican) in a landslide. He was very well liked.
Most of the gold hoarders were wealthy. They were looked at suspiciously as the group escaping with all the wealth out of the 1929 crisis. They talked up hard money, spread crisis narratives about US decline, used Weimar hyperinflation the decade prior as a benchmark, and extolled the necessity of hoarding gold. Some of the biggest offenders ran the paper gold markets. They were the same people who opposed federal taxes (federal taxes didn't exist before 1913), when the vast majority (like 90%) of people demanded them, because the status quo since the Civil War only benefited the wealthy and industrialists, and it became the biggest issue of the 1912 election, where Woodrow Wilson (a Democrat) crushed the incumbent Republican. It's important to mention there was Socialist Party at the time, Eugene Debs was its candidate I believe, and he won a large portion of the popular vote. I could tie this into Standard Oil's anti-trust of 1911 but for the sake of brevity let's push on.
My point perhaps, is that we picked up a severe political element with the 2020 run going into covid, amplified by Twitter (itself bought by a loudmouth); whence the main touchpoint of bitcoin evangelism came once upon the White Paper, it faded as a citation you'd hear often, replaced by readings like The Bitcoin Standard, written by Saifedean Ammous, who will engage in trans moral panic and political demagoguery within the same tweet; and you had fossil fuel pumping public miners who gravitated towards Texas because it's the only state with an independent grid which excludes it from [most] federal oversight, and they hired half-witted lobbyists to explain to partisans how they'll benefit personally, and why centralized forms of energy provided by integrated majors is a viable thing for bitcoin when the mining economy of scale says otherwise directionally, especially when energy storage encroaches on their unique grid positioning; Jack Dorsey, a product master, made a rare decision to endorse a polarizing figure with a trajectory into the fever swamps of conspiracy (Mr. Kennedy) who has no solutions, but loves talking about people and events, especially past events, ideas aren't so important; we had a foreign president in Bukele, whose bitcoin utterances attracted the admiration of the bitcoin's res publica, who think that even questioning his record on civil liberties equates to IMF and World Bank elitism, and they act as if bitcoin fandom justifies anything via utilitarian end points; we have the alt-right's own Jordan Peterson and data collecting Peter Thiel getting trotted out in prime time spots for the premier annual bitcoin conference in Miami; then of course the leverage saboteurs of Celsius, LUNA, and Block-Fi fame didn't help, using bitcoin as an affinity scam, and I wouldn't find it fair to mention them had an entire group of bitcoin podcasters not pumped them; otherwise we have crisis narratives galore, hyperinflation hopes, and culture war as answering tenets of "why bitcoin". How do you orange pill (using the word colloquially) without any of the that? Most don't have good answers.
People that don't think any of this stuff is a problem have an enormous blind spot, and don't understand friction. They are, in some telling, hellbent on keeping bitcoin Twitter the total addressable market of bitcoin. I remain quite bullish on bitcoin longterm, as I ever was for various reasons, mostly because of its fixed liberties and L2 work, and feel most of the friction elements discussed, the virtue signalers, and specious NgUers will get bled. Bitcoin has a quote price, and its volatility deals with beastly casts in wonderful ways. Such is my experience for so long.
They are, in some telling, hellbent on keeping bitcoin Twitter the total addressable market of bitcoin.
Underrated point. I think this -- and many of your other points -- are 100% true. But I'm a bit less bothered by it than I used to be ...
and feel most of the friction elements discussed, the virtue signalers, and specious NgUers will get bled.
... and that's why. Either btc's constituency will transcend the people who currently dominate the public spaces, or it will die, because despite the rhetoric, most of the so-called maxis are NGU disciples and nothing more. Once N stops GU, they'll scuttle back to their other hobbies. They stood for nothing in particular before btc, and they stand for nothing now, not really.
They're ideological carpet-baggers. They're not the people who see a revolution through.
I remain quite bullish on bitcoin longterm, as I ever was for various reasons, mostly because of its fixed liberties and L2 work,
Yes. So be the change you want to see in the world. SN is a great place to help with that, I think.
What change do you want to see in the world?
Too many to list, but wrt btc stuff, I'd really like to broaden the culture to one where well-intentioned people don't get canceled for heresy when they ask questions.
To take a hot-button example, the declining block subsidy, and what it will mean for btc security, is an existential issue. And yet people get buried in a shit avalanche if they bring it up, even well-respected core devs. It's hard to imagine a worse environment for threat modeling or for making a system resilient. Granted, the people who bitch and rant and threaten are overwhelmingly shitbags who contribute nothing to the ecosystem, but both science and history demonstrate that this kind of 'advocacy' is powerful even when the advocates are useless and contemptible.
I don't have a strong opinion on what the solution to dwindling block subsidy should be, or if a 'solution' is even necessary. I have a very strong opinion that being able to talk about it, and that having the dominant ethos of btc be one of serious intellectual engagement, is important. Being able to talk openly about things that matter, and not just parroting what the loudest Crypto Twitter thought-leaders say, is a big deal.
I'd like to change back to that.
deleted by author
deleted by author
It's interesting that there was a few months of "heads up" prior to the executive order. A hear a few libertarian Bitcoin types talk as if Bitcoin confiscation will happen over night, and if you're not already secure (coins off an exchange, living outside the US/Europe, coin mixed and difficult to trace, etc) then you're going to be in big trouble.
Keep alert to the narrative and news stories. I believe some sort of crackdown or discrimination against Bitcoin holders is in the future as fiat currencies collapse, but if you stay alert, you can weather the storm much better.
Totally agree on this. It's never all at once. If anyone wants an interesting book recommendation - "I Will Bear Witness", by Victor Klemperer. This is the diary of Klemperer, who was a non-religious Jew in Nazi Germany, whose wife was "Aryan" and who was also a WWI vet, so he was somewhat protected. Fascinating book. Anyway, in regards to the "heads up" - the Jews weren't immediately put into concentration camps when the Nazis took over in 1933. What happened was that anti-Jewish edicts came slowly, step by step. The first one that affected Klemperer was that he could only teach Jewish students (he was a college professor). Then he lost his job (which was a government job). Then he couldn't own a car. Couldn't have a pet. Couldn't walk in parks, couldn't walk on roads next to parks. All kinds of crazy new laws, slowly tightening the screws.
Yep, Bitcoiners shouldn't be naive and get caught flat footed. But don't be a doomer and move to a cove in the mountains tomorrow.
I can certainly see a case for this kind of thing but for it to really hit the market you need to lull people into a false sense of we won't touch your Bitcoin, here have an ETF, here we telling you its a commodity, here we have KYC on-ramps, here borrow against your bitcoin with institutions, here do multi-sig wallets with companies and then you could account for how much BTC you could reach easily lets say for argument's sake its 2 million
  • Now you can crack down on those easy targets
  • Then you go for everyone who bought a hardware wallet
  • Then you check IPs of nodes that were on clearnet
  • Go after mining pools in that country
and you gobble up all that Bitcoin,
  • Then you could appeal to the normies and say we give you X exchange rate and we won't punish you and see how many that bleeds out
Then all that's left is countries that don't enforce it, and private P2P Bitcoin, coinjoin Bitcoin and miners who form new pools outside these countries and while it would surly hurt short term, and for the individuals affected the network and Bitcoin economy can still run on the remaining float in circulation
Good luck finding every anonymous person connected to a non-KYC, self-custody Bitcoin wallet.
Persecute us Bitcoiners all you want but we will come out at the top
deleted by author
Another lesson from this is that FDR was no great president. Many more reasons but this is a big one.
I would not write anything off but I do believe it will be much harder to get people to part with their bitcoin. Unlike gold bitcoin is just private keys. You can store it so many different ways. Also in a digital age people would get on social media and point out how ridiculous it is for the government to try and confiscate people's hard earned bitcoin. Not saying that will stop them but it will expose them in many ways and you can move to a different jurisdiction with all your wealth if you are a Bitcoiner. The one thing that gold has over bitcoin is, as you pointed out, KYC. KYC sats are much easier to track than gold. However, a lot easier to "lose your bitcoin" than it is to lose gold.
All of the gold withdrawn after 1915 was kyc.
Interesting I did not know that.
What they don't know about, will make it difficult for them to find, those that bought via KYC exchanges are buggered
>there may be a time in the future where we will be required to register bitcoin ownership, especially "unhosted wallets"
Bitcoin has a marketcap smaller than several corporations. We’re a long way from the government kicking in your door to seize your coldcard.
deleted by author
Too bad I spend all this time on boats!
I would like to know if anyone successfully defied this order.
We should be like OBL. We disappear into the woods, never to be heard from again.
This is a powerful motivation to timelock Bitcoin. It is an impenetrable defense. They can imprison you and torture you, but for how long?
I'll have no empathy when bankers are eating grass and dog food.
The answer depends on your location.
I wonder how many of those gold coins hidden somewhere were lost and still remain undiscovered.
I think they don't need to do this today because Gold is not their "official money" and neither is Bitcoin, so they just print more fiat money debasing it and forcing people to invest and not hoard the fiat. With gold, they couldn't just print it.
Not possible with Bitcoin.
Nobody can know if you have 24 words in your head.
Thus: stop playing the victim you whiny loser.
Or tell them that you lost them all in a boating accident.
It's creepy to read something like this... Thank you for sharing.
deleted by author
That's a book right there
Great article, thank you for taking the time! Scary AF. I guess it doesn't matter how much freedom is granted to people by law; if they aren't willing to fight for it, it ain't there. This wouldn't have worked if people had taken to the streets. Democracies are responsive to loud voters. It also shows how powerful government becomes when the media is on its side.
Gold is difficult to move, otherwise this problem would have been solved by some other country enacting a more liberal policy, causing gold to flow out of the US. I doubt this would work with bitcoin, although some countries will try.
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.