...
Basically I see a lot of talk about bitcoin being above governing powers but people that state this usually have not been in a country that has stripped basic rights and made people do things they never would have imagined to their own loved ones.
Its easy to state these things when times are good or you trust the governing powers. Try to put your selves in the shoes of those that face far greater punishment and you may see that bitcoin is more fleeting than you are lead to believe.
When people are referring to "governmental powers" they are usually not referring to
an oppressive regime that is torturing and killing their own citizens. In that case, anyone
"caught" using Bitcoin/bitcoin would be effectively "eliminated" as the way to "regulate" its use.
But in normal countries, that is considered illegal and immoral, so your statement does not apply.
Currently, government attempts to "regulate by law" can not be incorporated into the Bitcoin network.
Your "bitcoin is fleeting" comment is pretty naive, since in your scenario Bitcoin/bitcoin use would be
the least of our worries. Western civilization, human rights, justice, and freedom would be over.
Its all different lines of the heavy hand by government. Just because "normal" government uses a slow push,as opposed to the heavy hand does not change the statement. What seems like a plan for the better is often a strip down of more human rights in the long term and does nothing to close the gap on the issue they where doing it for.
Just because people do not talk about the violent nature of governing bodies in some countries does not dismiss the fact that government does not have the interests of the people at hand when they crack down on things like bitcoin. "Normal government is also not as normal as you would like to believe and we are a global forum that draws from all parts of the world.
I do not see my statement about bitcoin being off either,if we enter a turbulent time it is what it is. You can not cast the statement aside because it is more black and white than you prefer. Think you also make a lot of the same points you just take issue with how I say it.
Your original response was in the context of governments that "[make] people do things they never
would have imagined to their own loved ones." and "Try to put your selves in the shoes of those that
face far greater punishment.". Those statements refers to oppressive regimens since it implies bodily
harm that is illegal in most if not all Western Countries, with rights that protect individuals as well as their
families. Interestingly, in most western countries today, the death penalty is outlawed, even for people
where there is video of their murder of another. So in most western countries today, even that is
considered "wrong" and not acceptable.
In addition, there are many mechanisms that exist in order to "correct" a failure of government that may
become more tyrannical or begin outright violating the laws. For you statement to be true, those nations
would need to be in martial law situations or the outright disbanding of the documents which grant the rights
to those citizens.
Normal governments are governments that are run by their own citizens, as opposed to the military, religious,
dictators, or other "self appointed leaders or council members". These are the types of governments you were
originally referring to, since in those countries it is possible that illegal bitcoin use could lead to "greater
punishments", then just fining or jail time.
Are you arguing that if Western Counties ban or make bitcoin illegal, they will suspend all known laws and start
having parents beating their children's feet with wooden poles and pulling the teeth out of their brother-in-law's
head, or leaving people in isolation for decades in secret prisons, because they transferred a bitcoin to another
person? I don't think so. Your original statement referred to "non-normal" governments.
If they become "tyrannical" one day, we are all done. Bitcoin was not designed to exist in a world were no one is
free. Bitcoin/bitcoin is dependent and contingent on freedom and freedom fighters.