it was not my intention
eheh
political theories and progress do not go together very well.
where did I say that works?
now that’s a complex topic that you are simplifying
and classic finance.
the evil that man does is directly proportional to the good. Only we focus more on the former. But I’m largely OT.
2 Likes
So what is your intention? Just doing the ages old “red scare” thing and expecting noone to criticize you?
Read through this thread, maybe also the two links that I posted might help:
Besides that, it is very obvious that there is this clearly nihilistic approach to everything regarding left wing politics in this thread, especially when I read stuff like:
and:
It’s not “human element”, it’s aggressive neoliberal disruption tactics. And before just bouncing back and forth about politics let me explain:
TLDR:
There are progressive and very much “socialist” approaches to cryptocurrency. We just don’t really talk about them.
There was many progressive and obviously left wing approaches to Crypto and Blockchain in the past.
My most favourite were farmer cooperatives that used their own currency based on blockchain for having an independent and closed finance system within their cooperative, whilst also being able to trace everything regarding their crop and meat. Most of the struggles, solutions and failures are documented in articles like these:
From these cooperatives, I was mainly interested in the CIC:
Their ecosystems work. Seriously, they just work! But only because they operate on base democratic and small scale. No intentions of moving further than that since they are also only interested in keeping their local markets alive and only exchange with other cooperatives that have their same approach.
But these are the exception, since these cooperatives have very flat hierarchies and are not interested in growing when there is no need to expand.
But what I read from all you “tech bros” is the very opposite of that. I wish that we would also talk about these projects, but all I read here is so far away from any interest in socially inclusive and progressive approaches, only social darwinistic “the winner takes it all” and “to the moon” stuff…
What’s so bad about nihilism?
I mean, it is a fact that nothing we do or say will have any lasting impact or meaning.
I’m a big fan of Marx, I think he was spot on with his analysis. Just a pity he thought he needed to be a revolutionary as well.
Look, I’m not saying that Socialism is always doomed to failure, but it has what Capitalists might call a scalability issue. There’s lots of great examples of small scale worker and farming co-ops and of course, the Blockchain offers some good solutions for them.
I probably should have made it more explicit that I was talking more “big society” than localised collective with my criticisms.
I’ll put it this way, Socialism (and the Blockchain too, probably) are a bit like shotguns. Bloody useful for farmers and groundskeepers, but I wouldn’t recommend giving one to everyone.
My problem with these things isn’t about their inherent usefulness, but the almost 100% likelihood that they will do more harm than good when unleashed on a whole society.
3 Likes
I understand your point now, but I will just add that we talk about todays society and how we perceive things with our contemporary view of things around us. But people can change (I know sounds cheesy…), it’s just a matter of socialization and education: I had the chance of growing up in two cultures. One very extremely selfless and (yes, to simplify it) collective. And later I grew up in an extremely individualistic and “nuclear family” society.
Both things (collectivism and individualism) can be very messed up when taken to the extreme, but I wish that, especially in regard of broader scaled economies, we would learn more about working together and not competing. And I hope so much that younger generations will learn this, since we are spoiled and can learn to be “better”, but we most likely won’t, since most of us trapped in a rat race of survivalism and 9 to 5 work, and the majority of the “winners” in this race either were lucky by being born into shamefully rich families, or try to defend their hardly earned privileges with pitchforks and torches.
And this is where technology like blockchain could actually help, but yet again: In todays world, with todays power structures and dynamics, things only can go south really quick until a critical mass of people understands that it does not have to be this way…
I should have clarified that I am talking about cynicism. Nihilism by itself is painful, but necessary as a means of “reality check”. But from that point onwards I myself e.g. want to “improve” the things that I don’t like around me. I am just talking about myself here, not trying to give any advice, but I myself would not be comfortable by saying “it is as it is” from that point onwards
1 Like
I was superficially implying that In a system with limited resources, factual equality that is imposed and not proportional to one’s abilities and direct contribution to society is logically flawed. I was also implying that a self-reflective, self-regulating and open to discussion system is more likely to be successful in the long run because it imitates how things work in nature.
No red “scare”, I just wanted to balance the negativity present in the 3d regarding the system we live in.
I need some time to view all the contents you shared. Thanks for the suggestions.
Do you really think cooperatives are applicable on a larger scale?
I don’t know who you’re talking about. I’m not a “tech bro” even if I value the role of technology in the evolution of the human species. I’m all for social inclusivity, but I’m not interested in old-school approaches that only pay lip service to progressivism. More in general I disagree with progressivism because I believe that change needs to happen at an individual level, through education and personal growth, rather than relying solely on political actions that just spin the wheels without really moving forward.
I come from a working class family and a leftist background , still I think that individualism and complete freedom without moralizing influences are the key to a better, more inclusive community.
The problem with progressive thinking is that it believes it has a greater understanding of social problems and a higher respect for human beings than those who think differently, and this is simply unfounded.
1 Like
Thanks for replying, I appreciate it and have a better understanding on your stance now!
Absolutely, I think it would be possible! But it would require a radical restructuring and rethinking, and it would not be applicable in every economy 1:1, but it is very much possible to apply the base structure of not growing when there is no need to grow, flat hierarchies and inclusive approach to (in what ever way) socially, physically or mentally disadvantaged sections of the population members of societies.
And before anyone pops out as an “expert” and says that this will never work: How can we know if it does not work if we did never see it in action?
Me too, but it cannot be technology by itself. Look at Oppenheimer and nuclear energy: Even if there is a (somehow) beneficial part of technology, it can easily and devastatingly be used against humanity (and all life on earth). It has to be critically and deeply researched before technology is just set out into the wild.
But this is exactly where the human element is crucial: We have to take action in this, and blockchain could help with that in a broader scale.
What “progressive thinking” are we talking about? I am also not a fan of virtue signalling, woke bubble thinking or purely theoretic approaches. But I fully disagree with the notion that it is unfounded or any kind of progressive change should only be done on an individual level.
There is very much founded scientific, social study and many more knowledge and resources, they just don’t really get the amount of financial support that they would need to progress.
Best example is COVID19: We could find several vaccines in a matter of a few months, because it was obvious that it is necessary to stop the pandemic. Knowledge, willingness and technology can actually solve a lot of todays problems, they are just not “profitable” in economic terms and therefore get very low support.
Look at climate change as the best example: I know for a fact that no amount of paper straws, vegan lifestyle and shaming ourselves and others on our carbon footprint can change the fact that the main damage is done by a handful of industries. It only creates an environment of individual punishment and leads to nothing else than people just doing nothing.
This is where the individual education and growth that you talk about will never help: It urgently needs to be regulated, restructured and changed, by being mandatory things that we learn in schools, in our jobs and also keep as a social contract amongst ourselves. And especially by holding those, that do not take these basic needs serious, accountable for their actions, including disruptive companies or any larger cooperation.
To get back to the topic: As David Suzuki has claimed several times, in todays economies we think about the gain we could achieve by chopping off trees in the rainforest and selling them, but we don’t have anything in economy that calculates the CO² emissions and environmental damage that we cause by doing so.
This is why I cannot support any kind of Blockchain that needs Proof of Work validation.
And even though there are Proof of Stake systems, it is clearly led by top down “whale” hierarchies, where those who hold the most coins can rule the whole blockchain.
The individual approach does not make sense here since every action that we take on an individual level has an impact on a broader level, because we deny the environmental damage that PoW causes.
And in PoS systems it is absolutely causing no change since the hierarchies are very much top down.
1 Like
This is the most capitalist realist thing I’ve read in a while. I imagine end-stage feudalists would tell themselves the same sort of things. The point of Marx’s critique is that you cannot have a fair and equal society based on capitalism because it is the structure of capitalism itself that gives rise to inequality.
Socialism turned sour in the Soviet Union, but so did capitalism in Russia yet we don’t hold up Russia as an example of how bad capitalism is, instead we point to how well the west did and pat ourselves on the back for our achievements(built on the backs of slaves, colonialism, child labor… reserve army of labor/the “third world”). Fact is, capitalism already kills millions per year, just not in rich western countries(who directly and indirectly benefit from those deaths). So when you say it’s bad we shouldn’t do socialism because people will die, then well you know, people are already dying. That aside historical and cultural context matters, and the kind of socialism/communism that would emerge in rich western countries would be very different from how socialism emerged in pre-industrial/feudal Russia and China, just like the kind of capitalism that emerged in Russia(and now in China) after the fall of the Soviet Union is very different from “clean” western capitalism.
2 Likes
You’ve added a shit ton of nonexistent baggage to what I’ve said there.
I know Marx very well, I’ve studied his works in pretty decent detail (as well as the likes of Rousseau, Hobbes, Locke, Hegel, Nietzsche) I know what he was saying about Capitalism and I agree with most of it.
At no point have I patted us on the back about the evils of capitalism, quite the opposite, I’m no big fan of it or the corruption it tends to reward. However, I’m also not a particularly big fan of revolutions, they tend to involve the violent deaths of millions of people, traumatise a generation and often end up achieving nothing nothing better than what they hoped to replace.
A lot of you on the left seem quite fond of putting the term “late stage” or “end stage” in front of your insults. What makes you think we’re in the late stages of anything?
Read Marx and understand that he’s saying that the end of capitalism is inevitable. I fall out with him when he starts with his permanent revolution bullshit, as this idea trivialises the harm that revolutions (both successful and not so much) wreake on a society. Revolution without some sort of serious plan for how to make things better is at best irresponsible and at worst fucking evil.
Capitalism is evil, fine, agreed, but I’m not seeing any better options than trying to make the best of a bad lot, because every alternative being offered either won’t work or will kill just too many people to be justified.
And don’t come at me with your inequality nonsense, what have you done in your life to fight inequality or promote equality?
I’m happy enough with my contribution, how about you? You just talking about inequality or are you doing something about it?
2 Likes
the problem with socialism in the USSR is that it resulted in food shortages, pervasive ideological propaganda, millions languishing in prisons, and an oppressive state apparatus determined to crush dissent and cling on to power at any cost. this might seem unimaginable for those of us in the west, however, in this essay i will
2 Likes
Russia was not “pre-industrial” when the Bolshevik coup took place in November 1917. According to the Swedish economic historian Paul Biroch, by 1913 Russia was number 4 in the world in terms of industrial output (after US, UK and Germany) and growing very fast, and seen as a threat to their interests by western powers. I say coup because the Bolsheviks were financed by Germany and also the US. It certainly wasn’t a spontaneous revolution. If it weren’t for WWI and foreign interference, It’s probable Russia would have transitioned to a parliamentary democracy.
Well western imposed capitalism in the 90’s (World Bank basically telling Yetsin what to do with the economy) was a disaster for tens of millions. Today, natural monopolies (railways, energy supplies etc) are state owned and the largest companies, are state controlled (majority shareholder )Rosatom, Rosneft, Gazprom. It’s a hybrid economy. It’s pretty certain the average Russian would agree that living standards now are far higher than in 1970’s and 80’s.
1 Like
Ask the same question in Moldova or Kyrgyzstan, you’ll probably get a very different answer.
But hey, without the collapse of the USSR, we wouldn’t have access to all the lovely cheap Kazakh electricity to run all those nice crypto mining operations.
And just like that, we’re back on topic…
3 Likes
Lot’s of cheap energy in Russia for bitcoin mining - especially from hydro in Siberia.
1 Like
I don’t necessarily believe in/want revolution, not to mention that the political left is dead(in most of the west) anyway. There will be more wars, pandemics and climate disasters in the future, I think a bad enough crisis like that could be the opening or turning point, but probably not within my lifetime.
What’s evil is saying we can’t have anything better than capitalism. Or that crypto will fix it.
No I’m not happy with it because I find it pretty damn impossible to take real responsibility in this system.
Sure but only 4% were working class. By far most (+80%) were still peasants.
2 Likes
I haven’t seen a good application yet, that couldn’t be done better without a blockchain.
City centre refuse collections where all the city public bins are connected onto an IOT blockchain network and fitted with level meters are emptied based on a route generated in realtime based on priority and not on a repeating route is just one example. To get a full understanding of the roadmap in full (weather you like it or not) the world economic forum in conjunction with Kate Raworth have mapped out the entire implentation. Its called the donut economic model.
Sounds great, but where was this implemented? Or is this just a concept?
Also:
Why on a blockchain? Couldn’t this be achieved with a “regular” encrypted databank? Because AFAIK blockchain validation is a quite slow and ressource heavy process
2 Likes
Amsterdam smart city. Maybe you could message them and tell them how to do it better.
No “bro”, I am sure you will take care of that, since your knowledge and brain seems to go “to the moon” 