That's a really good point - I think the underlying assumption is that the majority of people holding are doing so out of a genuinely informed understanding and not just what they interpret to be a consensus. If people feel out of their depth they appeal to authority and that is where there is potential for decline. Another thing is that a lot of people have more money than they can afford in crypto (admittedly this is a speculation) I think if there's a bad enough FUD (Let's say if an authoritative figure writes an expose' on BCH) and it loses 30% of its value this has the potential to cause exponential decline, similar to what we saw in Jan. I think we actually agree though, I don't expect anything to happen for a while because we are all in the business of making money. There isn't a lot of value in ruining everyone's fun, you know? One thing I'd love to get your opinion on. Once we start to see more common prosecutions for crypto fraud (and we absolutely will) and the FBI start actively pursuing individuals and investing tax, how do you think this will affect the market? A lot of people are holding on exchanges, impending tax legislation is good incentive to move this. Perhaps I was being flippant when I said 'soon'.
The way I see it, it can go a few ways and obviously its impossible to predict anything, especially in this market. Either we crack the adoption problem, either a 'powerhouse' get involved or we stagnate and die. Maybe I'll write an article on it, probably I won't.
The main issue is that as it exists right now I very much feel that there is a willful ignorance amongst a lot of cryptoadvocates, myself included. I think that we are perhaps turning a blind eye to the scale of debauchery taking place behind closed doors. With that said it's hardly like the IMF or WMO are exactly saints. Essentially, what I am trying to say is that this conversation goes far beyond just conversations of impressive technology and touches of several philosophical and ethical issues. For example, we are walking with smiles on our faces into what has been described as quintessential neoliberalism, perhaps anarcho-capitalism. The latter means Uncle Sam might just have something to say about. Which again, is another concern.
I went of on a bit of a tangent here, what do you think the next 5 years looks like for crypto (and by 'you' I mean you and anyone that happens to listen)
One area in which I think cryptocurrency has the potential to be EXTREMELY useful is in environmentalism. Simply because we need to monetize efficiency and saving. I'm not sure if this can effectively be achieved with fiat currency and in truth, just as I wrote this last paragraph I realised that I might have been ignorant. My area of interest is environmental monetisation and as such, I can see the great utility for the cryptocurrency, confined within the parameters of my own interest. I'm sure that an individual with an interest in Oil, Infrastructure, Travel or Agriculture could very easily raise the same, if not better, arguments than I could the applicibility of crypto to their area of interest.
I'm not entirely sure if I just managed to convince myself otherwise throughout the typing of this message. Perhaps. What an apt emodiment of the indecision us cryptoadvocates face, ey?
I love the way you argue @castbythecoast you sound open minded. So open minded you even convince yourself.
For me crypto is a way of getting rid of our current shit system. No matter which field of study you look at. At the end of the day we measure an economies success by the amount that has been spent that year, no matter the consequences. If there was an oil spill of the coast which killed wildlife and destroyed the environment and we spent a few billion cleaning it up is that good or bad for our economy?
The argument you have in connecting crypto and the environment would probably be better than mine because I am more focused from an economic point of view. The fiat monitory system we have going is far worse than any amount ever stolen in fraudulent ICO or crypto exchange hacks. Quantitative easing and fractional lending is theft if done by any normal person yet the bastards controlling the system can do as they please and call it fancy words. They devalue your fiat and steal your wealth daily and people has come so accustomed to it they don't even give a damn. Yet every passing day we can do less with our fiat and people are pulling heavy weight but they don't realize why that is.
Our president here in South Africa have a good saying to explain this. He directed his comment at the white population and said that it will be like boiling a frog in a pot. He will turn up the heat slowly so that the frog won't notice the raise in temperature and in this way he will slowly but surly kill the frog.
That's why the bastards gets away with it. They started out with 1% tax and said that it will only be for a short period. Now, 100 year later we pay truck loads of tax not just on your salary but everything you buy is also taxed. On top of that comes inflation and shit like licenses to do things you apparently don't have the right to do without asking people with apparent authority if you may please have permission to do.
We just have to make this work man and I think people, even though they don't directly see the effect explained above sense it. I know (more hoping for it than knowing) that people will tend to lean toward a system where there is less energy required to make a living and that for me is blockchain technology.
Great discourse here, @dpl. It's funny, because the old frog in the boiling pot of water is both something I've been saying for at least 3 decades now and also what I was going to use in my second part of this article. I'm not really sure who came up with it first. It's really the point of the illustration that really counts anyway. Plus, it's great to hear a politician actually using it. I hope he uses it to truly bring positive change. That part of the world could really use it too.
Ha! @positivesynergy you just gave away your age :p... :)
The more I read the work of people on this platform the more clearly I see how they make things happen.
In South Africa, like everywhere else in the world, it is divide and conquer. Here they use the race card to divide people (black against white). Positive change is never the objective. He is a Black president and directed his comment at white citizens back in the 90's, long before he was even president. They stir up different groups against each other to take focus off themselves while they steal the country blind.
It is a pity really! That people can so easily be manipulated. Like David Icke would say: we are all human. We are not different colors or races or religion and once we realize that 'they' lose all their power.
I think their long term plan is probably to bring war to this country as well. You know, like a long term savings plan. Because the way things are going now really does not make sense. This country is going to shit and it would not be the case if we just build it up together. There would be more than enough for everyone.
That's a shame, @dpl. You're right. It's been their strategy on earth probably as far back as the first kings ruled. I've noticed they've been turning up that dial and really picked up the pace all throughout all global media I see especially since Trump started running in 2015. It's to the point that from the outside looking in through all media (both mainstream and alternative) it's to the point that the US appears to be in a UNcivil mental and psychological War now like never before. To me the race war PsyOp is maybe the most insane of all, because we are all part of the same human race. Yet they have programmed into people's minds to "think" a darker brown skinned is of some sort of illusion called a "black race" and a lighter more beige skinned person is of some "white race".
source: PositiveSynergy
It's is ludicrous if you just take 5 minutes and think about it! And whilst this is going on they rob us blind and kill our neighbors.
That's where in my view if we react and get angry, we only play right into the game. In one sense even seeing it as their intended goal I think takes us down the same path too, when their is still a possibility that it is simply a case of their own blind triggers at work in them. I think that's the case for all so called "conspiracy theories" in the sense that judging the intentions of others creates the antagonist within ourselves and thus gives us the very same divisive effect. Plus, I can tell you firsthand that all throughout media these tactics are used to pull in eyeballs to sell sponsors and their products to; and let's face it, money does blind human nature from the truth. To me all of this that we see shows just another sign that this entire debt-based global financial system is coming close to running it's course at the end of it's cycle.
This is all where I believe each one of us has an opportunity to overcome our current state to decide for ourselves what it is we really want. It all starts with us. It starts with where we choose to focus our thoughts and emotions on. If we really want peace, as Gandhi said,
Being something we have not really been before requires us to think outside the box. That's really where I want to take this post conversation, even if I do a second part at some point, which would dig in deep to the past and how we got here. The first day of feedback on this post had a lot of activity, but the second day, which was the actual date of the title, seems to have completely died off. I guess it would have been better to have done it a week in advance.
You highlight good points @positivesynergy.
I really don't know why it is that the activity died down. This is a very good post! I'll try and draw some more attention here to see if we can't make it take off.
It's exam season for UK universities so I've been so busy! I don't intend on being quite so lacklustre in my responses in the future!
It's a vicious cycle, distrust of established global narratives through a belief that they are inherently geared toward individual preservation and inequality has the effect of dissolving these narratives - that's a good thing. It's quite possible, however, that without a unifying 'enemy', and with distrust of cultural rules or truths, we are left with infighting. It's the final stopping call of postmodernism in a sense.
Following the archaeology of this phenomenon is something that is universally useful though. Honestly, this 'ramping up' effect you've noticed I think started with the establishment of the American war economy in the 1930's/1940's - The GDP of the US rose from 6,000,000,000 pre-ww2 to over 300,000,000,000 post. From this point, American history very much becomes a story of war and subversion. The individual, me and you, the average person, are rarely filled with hate. Within our small communities and friendship groups, we cooperate and evolve. I just have this impossibly strong suspicion that global economics dictate that international relations must always be adversarial. I was recently talking to a friend of mine, who is studying for their PhD in Chinese/US relations and their likely evolution. His conclusions are hopelessly dark but I would like to introduce them into this conversation because I think from them we can begin to build the parameters of our future dialogue.
He stated rather firmly that Chinese expansion and growth is incompatible with the current US-centric global economic and political climate. As China develops it will encroach on US profit, that's not a contentious argument, as the world starts to move toward the Yuan the US will simply be unable to support itself. It has become a country of entitlements and services. Simply - it is very expensive to give 300 million people the 'American Dream'. China's expansion can be contorted into an assault on this dream and from that it is easy to see how the next 'red threat' can be born.
I know, this sounds unlikely but a cursory look through American history shows a pattern. Macarthyism didn't die with the Soviet Union.
Perhaps this is why I value platforms such as this so heavily. I love your comment on it starting with us. Certainly, this rings true. Nazism could have been stopped with one well placed and passionate objector early enough in its historical trajectory. I fear I've rambled a bit, but I'm halfway through a several thousand word essay on the logistics of evidential admissibility in rape trials, so forgive if I'm writing literally anything to procrastinate from that.
You know, you saying that actually set me off on an interesting train of thought. We often forget that we are responsible for making the world, as much or even more so than it is responsible for making us. Again, bringing this back to environmentalism - it is so easy to project you most lofty ambitions onto a governmental body, whilst simultaneously asking for a plastic bag to carry the single pear you bought from the shop. To me, the simultaneous externalisation of responsibility, the erosion of grand unified truths, the adversarial nature of global economics and subversion of truth for finance - have lead me to draw similar conclusions to you. We are, as we stand here today - The most powerful human beings to ever live - and a significant reason for it - as inconspicious as it might seem, is platforms like this.
I'm not going to read that back - but what I will do I reply something perhaps a bit more relevant down the road. Please do a follow up though! I'll try and engage a bit more with your points next time instead of just sounding off - again, rape law is sad and mandatory, global collapse is sad and optional - it's a law of exam procrastination that what needs to be done will always come after what wants to be done.
Have an awesome day