Bitcoin isn't Anarchy


1 month ago by phoenix

Today I’ll comment on an interesting post by Isaac Morehouse :

If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.

  • François Guizot, later attributed to Disraeli, Shaw, Churchill, and Bertrand Russell.

Yes, it is an ideal state of existence in a world that’s perfect and pure and inhabited by equally perfect and pure creatures. An open world with open hearts and open intentions and perfect balance within and without. I get tears in my eyes just thinking about it, I honestly do. I don’t dream of such ideal systems anymore, and I miss the naivety of my youth believing they could happen and have staying power.

Government is a compromise, Isaac, it was never meant to be anything beyond this. It is a game theoretical resolution to societies where everyone gives a little of their freedom in exchange for more freedom for everyone. Again, Tim Ferris explains this part better than I can (in what I consider, his most beautiful post).

A long line of political thinkers after Plato have slowly paved theway to the Enlightened thinking that gave birth to the American Empire.

This is anarchy, what Locke says is our natural state but what has historically and inevitably resulted in imbalances in freedom and opportunity. This is why he argued that a social contract is needed, Rousseau later agreeing with him and adventing Englightenment :

Sauce: waitbuywhy post above
This is what a democracy was built to look like :

Sauce: waitbuywhy post above

To get from one pic to the other you need to monopolize violence and delegate it to something that no single man controls, and only under the supervision of other people, and only with more people choosing who these people are, eventually representing the majority of the people.

It’s not a perfect system, and for all we know, maybe it fails above a billion people (as China claims), but still it’s the best thing we have and it’s given our civilization so much.

Perhaps one day we’ll be ready for more nuanced systems, liquid democracy and beyond, once our connectivity and reciprocity and transparency increases, but that day still looks far from my humble and increasingly cynic, current perspective.

I’ll end with Thomas Sowell, a former marxist turned conservative political scientist explaining it better than I can again :