And the name of Anastasia and her photographs in this article are designed to cause tears and violent emotions in readers.
This whole article is cheap PR and a game with the name of Anastasia.
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I don’t like it when someone uses other people's emotions.
This is like bringing a sword to a gunfight—whilst claiming that swords are “honourable” weapons, and you refuse to weapons requiring less strength and skill for a duel.
Yes, my argument is emotionally evocative—intentionally so, for the
good reasons explained below. Whereas foremost here, I must address my own motives and thought process.
I am a dispassionate thinker, and a passionate writer. I think through my arguments with cold objectivity, then open a blank page to express how I
feel about the conclusions which sound reason has already commanded. And far from being “cheap PR and a game with the name of Anastasia” as you allege, my essay is a Bitcoiner’s offering of a little homage to Anastasia’s memory. For the history of Anastasia is an issue that I actually care about—both as an issue in itself, and insofar as I regard Anastasia as symbolic of the many millions of innocent victims of Communist mass-murder. I did not simply pick her name out of a hat, or cast about for some convenient source of emotional impact.
I hereby have sincerely expressed my high respect for each of Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova, whom I am proud to memorialize by her proper title in OP, and Satoshi Nakamoto, the ingenious founder of Bitcoin. I have also imposed on this thread a moderation rule requiring that replies must “be kind to Anastasia, and honest toward Satoshi”. That is what I call a “win-win”, insofar as it is the intersection of the stories of two famous historical personages whom I remember for different reasons.
People must remember what happened to Anastasia, remember
why it happened, remember how the injustice of her murder was compounded by the insult of
identity theft intended to steal her memory and swindle her surviving relatives—and must stop the analogous
identity theft of a famous person in the case of Satoshi.
Of course, the respective circumstances of these two persons are very different and not comparable. However, Anastasia was royalty; and I do not think she would have objected to the wisdom of applying her own story to teach lessons for the greater good, as the names of the most famous royalty have always been spun into fables long after their deaths. Yes, I thought through all of this before writing my essay; and I asked myself, would a Grand Duchess want other than to let her name be a banner of justice to stop criminals from scamming for money, stealing power, and attacking
a noble cause? My biographical reading on the Romanov daughters’ graceful personalities leaves me no doubt. Although I can have no definite answer from one who has been dead for over a century, I wrote my essay with not only a clear conscience, but even a positive conviction that Anastasia would be pleased.
I do not understand what is new we have learned in this article.
Then, you missed the point. After having rethought the matter from first principles, I introduced in OP my own original thinking on how best to describe the Faketoshi scam. I have never before seen anybody call it
identity theft—whereas that is what it is, by definition! Thus have I developed a new way to instantly explain
the central issue to the average person, in terms familiar to the public consciousness. Everybody knows what
identity theft is, and everybody knows it’s bad.
Now, why has nobody else seen this as
identity theft? Perhaps that is because the term is usually applied only to much smaller cases. A mundane, garden-variety identity thief steals an identity to open and drain new credit cards in your name, or to commit a similar crime orders of magnitude smaller than the Faketoshi scam.
As a new symbolic archetype for
grand-scale identity theft, I chose the famous case of Grand Duchess Anastasia. I thereupon applied this symbol to communicate what the Wright scam really does to Satoshi.
When Craig Wright is properly labelled in the public consciousness as a perpetrator of grand-scale
identity theft, please remember properly to credit nullius for the idea.
You could just call it: Craig Wright is a liar.
But then no one will read this article.
Exactly: But then no one will read this article.If you insist on making arguments that
only use facts and logic, then I suggest that you should join one of the many online discussions wherein hardcore Bitcoiners refute Wright’s lies point by point. But please, do not tell others to use that form of argument for communications with the general public!
Self-defeating principles are ipso facto wrong principles. If your principles make you assist your own defeat at the hands of those whom you say are “wrong”, then you are wrong, too: You are passively fighting for the “wrong” which you condemn. If you bring a sword to a gunfight, then your “honour” and all your principles will die with you. If you insist on defending Bitcoin with
only facts and logic, then you will confine Bitcoin advocacy to a few obscure forums inhabited mostly by crypto-coders and technology enthusiasts with robot-logic. Thus will you surrender Bitcoin to those whose weapons are
only emotional and psychological manipulation—unavoidably, to such swindlers as Craig Wright. Observe that with no facts on his side, and with no logic on his side, he successfully persuades many people who
do not think through facts and logic.
I assure you that the emotional impact of
my Anastasia essay was fully, consciously intended—and moreover, intended to be exemplary:
This is how it’s done, folks! If you want to defeat the psychological support on which Craig Wright builds his hollow lies, then
find ways to wrap true facts and sound logic in an emotionally evocative form of argument, delivered with a rhetorical eloquence measured according to the audience. (On that last point, observe that OP was authored with much simpler language than this explanation, kept short, and bracketed by pictures.) Then, you will have the winning combination that Faketoshi lacks: The facts and logic that he lacks,
plus a potent weapon against his manipulation of people who neither verify facts, nor coldly reason from premises to conclusions. Under the weight of your logical iron core wrapped in passions, Faketoshi will implode as an empty shell.
Wherefore I encourage others to spread the Anastasia Bitcoin message to other venues of discussion, and also to create similar forms of argument upon the principles that I have hereby set forth.
