4 ms·
> Crypto is an anarchist experiment And, like every anarchist experiment before it, it failed. It continues to draw in new suckers every day, and that is a pro
by lern_too_spel 4y ago
> Crypto is an anarchist experiment
And, like every anarchist experiment before it, it failed. It continues to draw in new suckers every day, and that is a problem for society.
It doesn't matter if you didn't cause the problem. Because you live in that society, you still have to pay the cost to fix it or continue to take the losses from the problem existing.
It's the same with slavery, not educating blacks, and then not employing blacks in America. I had nothing to do with it. My family had nothing to do with it. But because I live in America, I have to either pay the cost to fix the problem or pay the ongoing cost of crime that the problem produces. Taking on the cost of problems others created is the cost of living in society, just as benefiting from the value that others create is the benefit of living in society.
The time to regulate crypto and cut our future losses was yesterday.
- jrm4 4y agoEvery anarchist experiment failed? The Internet's still around, buddy.
- svachalek 4y agoThe Internet was created by DARPA and while it got a little wild in the 90s, neither its origins or current form in any way resemble anarchy.
- Eduard 4y agoJust because "The Internet"'s _mainstream_ may not resemble anarchy, this doesn't prohibit other parts to resemble anarchy. In fact there are a lot of examples active and thriving "on the Internet" fulfilling various definitions of anarchy.
- jrm4 4y agoIt's a protocol that's literally not centrally controlled. It's the definition of anarchy. Not "cosmetic anarchy."
- namaria 4y agoThe thing created by a US Government agency at the height of the Cold War is your example of anarchist success story?
- jrm4 4y agoYes, because I'm not talking about "how it came into existence," I'm using the actual textbook definition of the word.
- namaria 4y agoThere is a LOT of -archy overhead to the Internet.
- jrm4 4y agoSure, but I think that still fits a common definition of anarchy. The idea isn't "chaos," it's "hey, the thing still works even though there isn't a clear hierarchy."
- namaria 4y agoJust because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there. That's like arguing "schools are anarchy, I see no hierarchy on the playground over there"
- lern_too_spel 4y agoThe Internet whose addresses are handed out by IANA? That Internet? Or are you talking about Web3 scamware?
- codehalo 4y ago>But because I live in America, I have to either pay the cost to fix the problem or pay the ongoing cost of crime that the problem produces. The "crime" the problem produces allow a lot of white men to put their kids through college, fooling themselves into thinking they are stopping "bad guys". If you dont keep them busy, they would create far more crime than you think black folk do. They might even start storming the White House.
- ohgodplsno 4y agoTo be fair to anarchists, it extremely often failed because of outside forces being violent towards them. Nothing in anarchy is inherently doomed to failure, and is a better demonstration of democracy than anything we have currently. (Because if there's anything an anarchist loves more than voting, it's one more voting round). Calling cryptocurrencies "anarchist" is walking on the corpse of actual anarchists and taking a big, steaming shit on them. Anarcho-capitalists have nothing to do with anarchy and are just kids whose bedtime reading was, regrettably, Ayn Rand.
- rightbyte 4y agoI guess people think Mad Max rather than "everything is run by tiny councils" when they think about anarchists.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoAnarchy is defined as absence of government and authority, with unlimited personal freedom as a consequence. This is fine if you're living alone, but in groups, you have unbounded externalities. Tiny councils are tiny governments.
- ohgodplsno 4y agoIf you let your own ignorance define anarchy, sure. Anarchists simply want every single thing to be voted on by the people, whether through referendum or randomly picked representatives. Anarchists agree that there should be governing bodies (merely that they shouldn't be the ones we have right now, and that they should be more representative and prevent the formation of a political class) and that authority should also be granted by these governing bodies _and_ revokable by the same. Hence, there is nothing an anarchist loves more than voting. It does not prevent living in groups, just that there are no leaders in that group. By saying it is defined as an absence of government and authority, you're either thinking of ancaps (which are a bad right wing joke made up of said Ayn Rand readers), or dogshit propaganda fed to you. Read a bit.
- int_19h 4y agoLast I checked, the Zapatistas are still around.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoThe FLDS cult is still around too and for about twice as long. Its mere existence doesn't make it a successful experiment.
- int_19h 4y agoThen you should clearly define "success". So far as I can tell, the Zapatistas did succeed in building the society that they wanted and kept it going for several decades now. Are you claiming that they aren't meaningfully anarchist?