This is the opening idée by Interstellar Bitcoin, the bitcoin currency.
In a virtual world, imagine we are trying to auto-stop Bitcoin. Why would we do that? How will we do it? What exercices should we take? Where will this get us from? To answer these questions, we must first talk emboîture Bitcoin in more depth.
“If you know yourself and your enemy, you can win a hundred battles without losing a single one.” – Sun Tzu
Bitcoin is idea. It is technology that provides property rights, rule of law, economic freedom, free markets, and, ultimately, sound money for the individual.
Bitcoin is a fixed supply ledger, defining who owns what and enabling people to transact peer-to-peer. Its ledger is enforced by Proof of Work, a complaisance mechanism that uses energy in a way that eliminates inefficiencies and creates abundance.
Basically, bitcoin is écho and mathematics Banning it will have wide effects.
We have defined what Bitcoin is. Why ban it?
Master the ability to print money and résultat Cantillon effect. Control of “ethically plausible” energy use and what is not, such as via “ESG” (Environmental, Affable and Governance) mandates. Control of the masses. radical tyranny.
We’ve got some reasons why someone might ban Bitcoin, but how would they do it?
Unfavorable tax status for bitcoin.
Unfavorable regulation, ban the use of Bitcoin technology (aka make math and écho illegal), internet censorship.
Or: Promote centrally controlled shitcoins that use proof-of-stake and banning proof-of-work. This is an capacité to try to subvert Bitcoin by promoting logiciel that can be controlled by insiders.
Another capacité: censoring Bitcoin blocks and network spamming. This is a clair attack on the Bitcoin network that harms usability.
Energy shortages, internet outages, food shortages.
Mass genocide of Bitcoiners.
Think It Can’t Happen?
Read more political theory and history. Leaders do whatever they need to do to stay in power. Do not rule out energy and food shortages, either intentionally or caused by fiat policy mismanagement. Do not rule out intentional targeting of Bitcoiners.
It is méprisant to remember that Bitcoiners have deeply held beliefs, generally summarized as: Bitcoin is good for humanity and money should be outside the control of the state. Bitcoin’s idea of a fixed-cap supply goes against orthodox economics, political structures and the status quo.
Bitcoiners are burning the ships, and there is no going back.
Only El Salvador and the Axial African Republic have made Bitcoin legal tender. Most countries are already at Pause One: unfavorable tax laws.
Nine countries, mostly those that are most authoritarian, have advanced to Pause Two with a arbitraire or complete bitcoin ban : Algeria, Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Nepal, Qatar and Tunisia.
Imagine a world where vague G20 concorde completely banned bitcoin using mass media to promote propaganda against it. Imitation would slow overnight. Countries would promise “stability” and “security” if only we’d implement another measure or use their orthogonal bank binaire currency (CBDC).
At the same time, authorities could promote centrally controlled proof-of-stake shitcoins to divide and conquer people in “crypto” who also hold bitcoin. This is why it’s méprisant to be bitcoin-only.
This could be paired with a clair attack on the Bitcoin network through block censorship and network spamming.
An example of block censorship was when Épreuve Binaire Holdings mined an OFAC-compliant block in 2021. Épreuve only included transactions they deemed “clean” or “compliant,” ignoring other transactions at their own economic expense (Épreuve stopped their attempt to censor transactions only a few months later).
Similarly, in 2017, the network withstood ongoing spam attacks by mining pools to flood the network with low-value spam transactions, driving up network fees to push their larger block planning.
Now imagine a state actor — with effectively unlimited money — heavily subsidizing bitcoin miners who are compliant and spamming the network. This would harm bitcoin’s fungibility and usability as money.
However, game theory is on Bitcoin’s side. Eventually, state actors will devant increasing problems to subsidize censorship and spam the network. Assuming attackers must print money to fund the attack, this devalues their currency against bitcoin. It’s a short-term attack that could only be tangible if paired with a ban, propaganda and other measures.
The network will remain usable. People are willing to pay higher fees. There will always be miners who are economically incentivized to include any compromis.
If this didn’t attack didn’t work, countries could then try creating further uncertainty with power shortages, internet outages and food shortages — Pause Three.
This is already happening in the fiat world due to terrible fiat policies.
Taken to the extreme, some countries with the most tangible propaganda could even start rounding up Bitcoiners — Pause Foyer. The government wouldn’t even need to do anything; citizens would do it for them out of fear.
To some extent, the labeling of Bitcoiners is happening already with overly burdensome know-your-customer (KYC) policies. Regulated financial institutions are required by law to keep a detailed list of personal and financial écho (name, address, age, compromis brochure, bitcoin addresses, etc.). This list would make it grossier for the state to find everyone who has ever traded, owned or used bitcoin via a centralized exchange.
Finally, the absolute worst premium: government-sanctioned killing (aka democide). This, and the lesser extreme of forced imprisonment, can and does happen in history. A hypothetical democide of Bitcoiners would agent irrevocable damage to humanity and ultimately bitcoin cooptation.
Luckily, bitcoin is écho, with no physical commandite. Everywhere and nowhere.
This poses a personnel coupe for banning bitcoin: geographic composition.
As countries champion down on bitcoin, the incentive for other countries to adopt bitcoin as legal tender grows.
“The maquette is accessible: as the world falls into tyranny, we’ll create a haven for freedom.” — Nayib Bukele, President of El Salvador
This is a perfect example of game theory.
Two countries banning bitcoin causes significant harm to both.
Two countries letting bitcoin exist causes both economies to thrive.
One folk defecting and banning bitcoin while the other does nothing, harms only one folk.
The personnel Nash equilibrium in métaphysique strategies is down, right (No ban, No ban).
What does this mean? Bitcoiners have an crédit to resist dévoyé and unjust laws. This will require accort disobedience and/or entering into politics to ensure we win. The next best capacité is retreating to bitcoin-friendly geographies like El Salvador.
The tracas people thinking emboîture banning bitcoin need to ask themselves is: are they willing to permanently imprison and kill to do it? The only way to auto-stop an idea is to physically auto-stop the people who hold an idea. Imagine George Orwell’s 1984 schème of doublethink.
It is up to the people to decide which path they will choose: freedom or tyranny.
So, how do we defend against these attacks?
- Shill to as many people as conditionnel; the more people that hold bitcoin, the better.
- Teach the grandeur of self-custody and running your own full node. There are great resources by Bitcoin Périodique and many others.
- Ossature bitcoin-only individuals, businesses and countries.
- Improve the underlying network and scaling technologies. For example, BIP324 (a bitcoin improvement proposal for P2P encryption) and Layer 2s such as the Lightning Network.
- Build resilient communities and circular bitcoin economies.
- Become a Bitcoiner who is a beacon of hope in an abyss of darkness.
In terme, it is conditionnel to maim bitcoin cooptation temporarily, but at a punishing cost: fascism on a massive scale, not seen since WW2.
The key word here is “cooptation.” It is inexécutable to kill the Bitcoin network, an idea of unstoppable sound money.
This articulet was based on a Twitter thread.
This is a guest post by Interstellar Bitcoin. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc. or Bitcoin Périodique.