Topic: Bitcointalk with a socialist instead of an ancap in charge. - page 2. (Read 304 times)

TBH if their route became Facebook/Twitter -> bitcointalk, although they'd still be posting stupid links, it would probably be an improvement on the current route of Bitchute/NaturalNews -> bitcointalk.

But relocation to Siberia will of course remain the dream.

Compared to the affirmative action going on here for trolls, spammers, and other assorted idiots, sending them off to Siberia twitbook and snapgram wouldn't be that bad, would it.

Just one of those things where the allegedly "ancap" forum is about as communist (equality at the expense of efficiency) as it gets.

It didn't need any help though, surely? It mangled itself. It's an outdated and discredited concept, more wishful thinking than anything else.


I always come out as that, too. I'd imagine we're quite over-represented on the Politics and Society board of a bitcoin forum.


To some people (although not myself), communism as a theoretical concept is appealing. Its crucial failure in practice is that it is so easy to corrupt. But isn't this true of any extremist ideology? An ancap society in practice would surely go the same way (albeit via a different route).
What do you imagine a forum run by a socialist might look like? Red background, hammer and sickle everywhere? Forum rules only altered in accordance with the current five-year plan? Trolls sent to Siberia for "re-education"?

I've only just started this one...

Legal Systems Very Different from Ours
By: David Friedman, Peter Leeson, David Skarbek
Narrated by: David Friedman




Ha Poker Player you just gave me like a triple "geek out" I adore Milton Friedman and the books he and his wife wrote, their son is quirky and has really interesting books and ideas as well ---quite different from his dad.

P.S. finally someone who doesn't mangle the invisible hand concept   -- thank you :-)

We're pretty lucky to have Theymos "in charge"

Whoever has the biggest guns. But whatever happened to Proudhon's 'property is theft'?

But making the huge assumption that such a society could actually persist in some form of stability without degenerating into a bloodbath, everything would be controlled by monopolies and cartels.

Who enforces private property rights in a stateless an-cap society?  What happens if workers at my factory keep what they produce or tenants living in the home I own don't pay rent? 

There is no competition and merits are not scarce. It's basically a participation trophy, just show up and post something coherent and you'll get a merit - no elaborate talent show required. I don't know whether that's "socialist" or "capitalist" or "ancap" or whatever juxtaposition you're trying to do here, it doesn't seem to be political at all.

Looks like you are obsessed posting negative content about Socialism and painting it in a bad way.

Are you painting Socialism in a bad way because you don't know much about it or are you painting Socialism in a bad way because it is your only intention to be negative?

I don't know where you draw those conclusions from, but you seem to have little knowledge of real socialism and what it represents. In fact, the decentralized trust system and the merit system fit very well into socialist society. As far as "political censorship" is concerned, it has more to do with communism than socialism.

This thread is the result of a thought process that originated from reading this:


Before reading that I didn't know anything about how he thinks, but since then, and knowing more and more how the forum works, I keep thinking how different the forum would be if instead of an ancap in charge we had a socialist. The hypothetical scenario of a communist, I don't even consider it, because they have the virtue of ruining everything they touch, so I think the forum would have run out of traffic and probably disappeared long ago in that case.

I will outline the three main things that I believe would be different if a socialist were in charge:

1) Political censorship.

That's for sure. It's along the lines of what we can see elsewhere on the internet. The freedom of expression here would not be the same. The degree of censorship would depend on how sensible the (socialist) person in charge was. But at the very least we would have seen censorship on the COVID issue.

2) The trust system would not be decentralized.

In the OP of DefaultTrust changes, Theymos mentions David Friedman, who is an ancap, and son of Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman.
Decentralizing the system is along the lines of believing that if you let people interact with each other, the system will self-regulate. It's kind of like what Adam Smith called "the invisible hand." You don't need a politician from above imposing laws, rules and regulations, people interacting with each other does much better.

3) The merit system would not have been created.

And I think another worse solution would have been implemented, although we can never know for sure. The system is not perfect, but it is very good. It rewards those who make an effort, instead of trying to equalize, redistribute and talk about "unfair advantages". It is a typically capitalist system of competition, effort and reward for effort and a job well done.

This is what I have been thinking lately and I would like to read what you think.