Yes there are only two outcomes. Really. That's it.
So why don't you fucking tune out of the culture wars and start looking at which politicians are saying what when it comes to CBDCs, the WEF, fucking the Bank of England and carbon credits.
Why the f-ck did anyone ask Klaus Schwab the time anyway
- Thread starter gosub
- Start date
Yes there are only two outcomes. Really. That's it.
So why don't you fucking tune out of the culture wars and start looking at which politicians are saying what when it comes to CBDCs, the WEF, fucking the Bank of England and carbon credits.
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
Not even wrong .. there's really no way to engage meaningfully with what you're posting here.
It's on a jet fuel / steel beams level. You really need to get offline, and I mean that with kindness.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
That's a false dichotomy. We're talking about society in all its messy complexity here, not some binary value in machine code.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
No, they can't. Their power is not based in the rules as they exist but in the social relationship they propagate and the means of physical imposition of ownership that they control. You can't game your way out of it, because even if you win (and you won't, because you're playing in a casino they own) they can simply flip the table and ban you from the house.
If you think that you've really not been paying attention to anything that I or anyone else on here has written. Again, if you had the foggiest about what libertarian communism actually is it'd probably help you not to sound so ignorant.
See above.
Capitalism is centralised power. The entire concept is built around a minority who own, and a majority who don't. This is the fundamental, gigantic flaw in all your arguments.
Imagine people see it your way. They can build it your fucking way by setting up "collectives" or whatever the fuck you want to call it - on the blockchain.
If you need power to enforce whatever you want, then whatever you want, is centralised power itself.
Really? That's what you come out with when I say / imply the WEF is bad news?
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
Again, if you read any "fucking" political theory at all, you'd have the historical background to understand that's not how it works. Libertarian communism (and leftism generally, for that matter) has repeatedly tried what Colin Ward used to call the "seeds beneath the snow" strategy - build the new world in the shell of the old. It's useful to a point. Setting up co-ops provides infrastructure for a movement, for example. But ultimately the levers are all controlled by State and Capital. Breaking those levers can't be done on their terms. They don't give up power because you've outplayed them. We learned through mass arrests, the banning of strikes, the use of fascism. Believing in crypto is a view that only sees the velvet glove, but it's the fist underneath that maintains the status quo.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Every single billionaire, all the owners and controllers of all industries in the current socio-economic order have interests that are fundamentally opposed to the interests of those of us who have to sell our labour in order to survive, i.e. people like you and me.
This focus on subgroups like the WEF is profoundly tunnel-visioned.
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
No mate, it's what I come out with when you use terms like "forces of evil", say there are only two (two!) possible outcomes for all of humanity, and when you load me down with "culture wars" I couldn't give a fuck about (because the whole notion is entirely confected by idiots, for idiots, to draw focus from the actual social progress we need)
No really. There's only two outcomes.
We can be somewhere inbetween, but certainly by 2030 at the earliest or 2050 at the latest, it will be one or the other.
And I honestly believe you're secretly rooting for the authoritarian one.
Good. I'm not interested in culture wars. And yes, there are only two outcomes possible.
That's because of the way technology is progressing.
Either we decentralise, or if we keep going, those with power will do what they do, because they are incentisvised to do so.
Just this week the Dutch parliament passed a motion that the Dutch government should not make any deals with the EU for digital identity.
The Dutch government ignored it's own parliament and signed an agreement with the EU for digitial identities.
It's all there to play for. You can't blame them. Going against democracy and doing what the fuck they can.
If governments don't centralise, if governments don't take control of every aspect of our lives, then governments of the future will have very very little power.
As I said, either the government has total control of our lives Chinese style, or there will barely be any government. One or the other.
Historically there has been guns, capital etc. But not the kind of technology we have today.
Capital flows into the crypto economy, including old capital. So it's impossible for a lot of old capital (but not all) to attack crypto without hurting themselves.
It's very interesting to see Microsoft's attitude to crypto. They are up to their necks in it, but are still trying to fight the properties they don't like. For example, they have a lot of hatred to an uncensored distributed web, which speaks volumes.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
It's literally been heading directly towards being both for the last 40 years. Privatisation of all previous government functions to a handful of billionaires while increasing State control over the individual. No NHS, welfare safety net or universal post, and no right to protest. You're busily wanking on about this vague war on centralisation, good vs evil blah blah blah while not understanding a single aspect of how society actually functions. Worm's eye view.
Again, they already own the means of production and the means to protect their assets. It does not matter whether Capital has "flowed into the crypto economy" or not.
Last edited:
People need a worms eye view. How better else for them to understand right.
So we start at being able to protect wealth, today and into the future. That's the role of bitcoin.
Do we at least agree on that?
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Repeating a fallacy does not make true. Nothing about this vague decentralisation bollocks you keep wanking on about actually challenges the current socio-economic system. "Protecting wealth"; that shit is exactly what the capitalists are doing when they pull shit like putting people on zero-hours contracts. The ruling classes are not some monolithic and centralised bloc, so why the fuck would decentralisation be a threat to them? They don't need to coordinate on a grand scale, it's merely enough for them to effectively pursue the preservation of their own wealth and power.
As for imputing secret motives onto me, well you can make up any old shit, so long as you're unburdened by the need to support anything with evidence or argument.
It will change a lot of the system. If done from the ground up, it will transform communities.
Cryptocurrencies can facilitate the exchange of goods and services within a community without the need for a central authority or third party to facilitate the transactions.
This can help to foster greater self-sufficiency and resilience within the community, as it reduces the need for external resources and intermediaries.
DAOs, which are decentralized organizations that operate on blockchain technology, can also help to facilitate decentralized decision-making and resource allocation within a community.
For example, a community could use a DAO to collectively decide how to allocate resources or to vote on decisions that affect the community. This can help to ensure that all members of the community have a say in how resources are used and that decisions are made democratically, rather than being dictated by a centralized authority.
In this way, cryptocurrencies and DAOs can help to empower local communities to organize and govern themselves in a more decentralized and autonomous way.
I believe that aligns with the principles of libertarian communism. No?
If you can't protect YOUR wealth, how can you build it?
There's only one outcome, there are many possible outcomes.
Your tunnel vision about government means that you're rooting for a more authoritarian option than most of the people you're arguing with.
If you depose/crush/undermine government while corporations maintain the level of control they have, they'll fill the gap, with much less opportunity for protest and reform than any government.
On a day to day basis government interference in my life is pretty much just taxes, the majority of which pay for infrastructure, pensions, and care for vulnerable people that I'm happy that we cooperate on, a large part is spent on less palatable things, or wasted, that I'd like to change.
It's my work that tells me where to be, what to wear, and what to do for most of my waking life, and takes a chunk of my productivity comparable to taxes to spend how they want, day in day out.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
You're definitely taking the piss now.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Cryptopiss. He swears it'll be the next big thing
Similar threads
