Topic: Bitcoin as a Form of Anarchy - page 3. (Read 891 times)

Anarchy according to an online dictionary is:    

BITCOIN SYSTEM IS NOT AN ANARCHY.
Bitcoin a bit like human body... there is a set rule which every part of the body (including the head or brain) follows.
The head or brain can't go against the rules or stop serving some parts of the body it is in disagreements with....An ideal system should work this way.       If the brain stops playing its roles, the hand, mouth, stomach etc won't feed it nor will this parts function anymore and the whole body dies. No part of the body drags the rest backward. They are built on rules, more like  automated rules.

Interestingly,  the human body have nodes-like rules/blueprints which are distributed around the body. this blueprints are why our bodies were assembled correctly, function properly, regrow tissues, transport nutrients to the right places etc . The copies of the blueprints are distributed in every part of the body. All the trillions of cells in our body have a copy of the blueprint each or better still, the blueprints are exactly thesame in every cell... You won't be wrong to call a human body a Natural Blockchain with trillions of nodes.


If  human body doesn't qualify as Anarchy as defined by online dictionaries then blockchain is definitely not Anarchy. Blockchain is self-regulating like Human body.  It should work well without problems just like human body.

It will be quite difficult for bitcoin to attain the widespread adoption we so desire without regulations from governments of different countries. Where there is a ban you cannot fully have a functional bitcoin or blockchain activities.

I see where all this is coming from, but it carries a danger: factionalism. Those "branches/forms" of anarchism are arguably just the political divisions we already have today with new names.


My take is that it wouldn't be healthy for any one of these ideas to dominate, because any of them could have a role to play given the right circumstances. Real life is too complicated to assume that a single idea for organizing will work in every situation. How about using just one word describing the ideology of letting ideas prove themselves in real situations according to their observable efficacy: anarchy



anarchy is always presented to us in the media or in movies/tv as chaos. But it does not mean chaos; "self-rule" or "emergent order" are less politicized descriptions.

an anarchical system of government can be compared to a tyrant system whereby order and decisions are vested on a central power, but this is quite different for bitcoin as we have seen overtime the emergence of altcoin that coexist side by side with bitcoin. I dont really see bitcoin enjoying that dictatorial leverage.

Bitcoin intends to do what you want it to do. If you want to work your way around governments and everything that's centralized, then Bitcoin is a fantastic tool allowing you to do so in the most convenient way.

Some people find Bitcoin more like a currency type of tool for payments, which is great too even though the on-chain transactions are quite an obstacle in that field. LN will be it then.

For the first time people can choose to do whatever it is they want with their finances. It's an incredible power that can't be stopped by anybody. Let people just use it the way they want and call it whatever they want. Freedom.

Cypherpunks are all anarchists, directly or not. Satoshi comes from this type of person.
No, Bitcoin doesn't need to be overloaded with regulations, basically, it doesn't need any. Look yourself, over the past decade, Bitcoin has been doing pretty well with almost no regulation.
Bitcoin was created to avoid these same regulations (and more), why accepting again to be controlled when a new currency supposed to be decentralized appears. Better to go back to fiats if we're still controlled by someone.

Unfortunately for most of the "left" world socialist economy means quite the opposite: Major state economic intervention, "command" central planned economy, absolute control (replacing the market with their own, whatever...) The opposite to what Bitcoin represents, which renders the State powerless in regards to money.

But yes, i can see anarchists liking it, others hating it, and some wanting to make their own variant. That's the point...

I live in a "socialist" country that denounces anarchism, while some urban-anarchists support it because "the right is worse"... And the result has been abysmal to the masses. None of the State officials are in need of anything, while most of the people are.

You may have a point, but anarchy is too strong a word to use, bitcoin isn't in any way trying to oppose government rules or system of payments all it does is provide a more comfortable and accessible means or method of payment, one that is decentralized and puts control in the hands of people.

Bitcoin can in no way be anarchical, as it doesn't intend to overthrow the government or it's system of payment

Maybe you're right cpz btc can't be fully regulated by govs

We still do not know what the launch of Libra will lead to, but I think it will be very interesting

Bitcoin is the naughty child and the fox in the Hen house and Anarchists just love the disruptive impact that it has on the current financial system and also the uncontrollable nature of the technology. Governments only realized too late that Crypto currencies cannot be stopped and that they will have to adapt to a whole new way of thinking to try and regulate it.  

Libra woke the Giant in the US and governments are now very focused on regulating Crypto currencies to protect their reserve currencies, because Crypto currencies can have a huge affect on the value of their local currencies.  

Money itself is a form of anarchy too, we should go back to barter system, no dollar no currency no fiat no crypto, but people with higher IQ don’t want to do that, they want to be the only 0.1% of elites of the elites.

just because bitcoin is not the same system as we are use to that doesn't make it an "anarchy". for starters bitcoin is not a society to want a government and it is not defying the authority of the government. bitcoin is a currency or a payment system that has its own rules and laws and it is sticking to them. and lets not forget that it all started because the current payment systems were severely flawed and also corrupted and needed fixing.

Governments didn't support (and most still don't) Bitcoin for the longest time, and it's gotten to the point where even the President of the United States has tweeted about it. Adoption is happening and governments can't claim any credit.

Bitcoin doesn't need government support; in fact, the most ideal scenario for it is complete non-intervention from governments. Bitcoin is inherently anarcho-capitalistic, so the idea that it needs outside intervention is pretty misguided. Support could even be detrimental in some cases, considering the fact that it will surely come with some sort of compromise.

Yes, anarchy does have many branches, one branch of the ideology of anarchism is a market free of anarchy (anarchy capitalist). Okay, I agree that bitcoin is included in anarchy capitalism.


I'm not saying that anarchy is chaos. What I mean is a socialist economic system without government. coordination and management, without the bureaucratic rules that are broadly defined as being superior in economic, political and administrative areas

Bitcoin can exist with or without government support. Its money that is out of control from the State, it can be useful to anyone willing to use a money that can't be manipulated by the State, or any private institution.

If anarchists decide to use it, its their choice because they studied it and found it useful.

They can also give a try at making their own altcoin, hopefully not deviating too much from Bitcoin. Community money isn't new, but crypto is far more secure.

As for Spain, one reason Franco won was the irreconcilable division between communists and anarchists. Another would be Hitler's aid... Spain went back to being a monarchy ever since the fall of the republic, a bit before WWII.

These days the difficulty in mining has increased tremendously, but it needs some community to take it further without which the network gets collapsed. When we state bitcoin as anarchy it needs to be clear that there isn't any governing body which is completely against the ruling authorities.

To my understanding the decentralized state of the network is misinterpreted at times which too is a kind of manipulation of the market.

How can mass adoption occur if there is no support from the government?

without government support, there will be no major adoption in a country. It cannot achieve the success of bitcoin to be used globally.

Isn't private because the blockchain is public information, but you can always use a mixer service , and change it for fiat doesn't take more than 1 hour if you do it by the right way.


But getting back on topic, i don't think we should compare bitcoin with anarchy because is like more like a 3 divided power system: Miners, Coders and Users. Each one of them could take decisions if a good idea comes out. Is just my point of view.

I don't know if I really follow that comparison. I mean, with Bitcoin it's all about who has most mining power, at least when it comes to the people who generate their own Bitcoins. We're long past the days where anyone could just mine Bitcoins with their personal computer, now it requires vasts sums of capital.
You could say the same about trading, it's the people who have the most capital, who stand to make most out of Bitcoin.

So where exactly does anarchism come in? I can see that there could be one aspect of anarchism embedded into Bitcoin, so paying for goods and services with Bitcoin and with Bitcoin alone.
The thing is, most businesses convert their Bitcoin earnings instantly to fiat. I only know of a couple of companies that actually keep their Bitcoin revenue in Bitcoin. Even then it's not 100% of their revenue.