4 ms·

Here's a good article: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/10/technology/crypto-debanking-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/10/technology/crypto-debanki...

by ghc 1y ago

Here's a good article: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/10/technology/crypto-debanking-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/10/technology/crypto-debanki... Treating crypto as a risky and destabilizing security (like subprime mortgages) is a valid reaction to what happened during the SVB and FTX implosions. Accusing Elizabeth Warren and the Biden administration of being actual fascists over it is absolutely wild. Similarly, saying "everyone knows" Biden was not the actual president, USAID was a terrorist funding organization, and that we can't keep track of money without blockchain....these all originate in QAnon circles or Russian state media. To quote CS Lewis' novel, "That Hideous Strength", on why this is so dangerous: > “Why you fool, it's the educated reader who CAN be gulled. All our difficulty comes with the others. When did you meet a workman who believes the papers? He takes it for granted that they're all propaganda and skips the leading articles. He buys his paper for the football results and the little paragraphs about girls falling out of windows and corpses found in Mayfair flats. He is our problem. We have to recondition him. But the educated public, the people who read the high-brow weeklies, don't need reconditioning. They're all right already. They'll believe anything.”

chermi 1y ago
You ignored the entire issue. It was extralegal. If they wanted to do something about it, they should make clear laws and enforce them. And to add, I would say what you're doing is basically trying to forbid thought and discussion about what USAID has done or the Biden situation by tying it to something so reprehensible no one will want to associate with it. I don't like that. I want to be able to question USAID and what my president is doing. Stick to rebutting the actual ideas, it's a much healthier way to engage. Edit-- I agree fascist label is wild, but can we admit there might be some hmm, fairly recent precedence for wild and often offensive use of terms like fascist and Nazi?
- ghc 1y ago
  > You ignored the entire issue. It was extralegal. If they wanted to do something about it, they should make clear laws and enforce them. That's actually not true. The SEC & FDIC have broad authority to issue recommendations regarding risk. There are clear laws on the books dating back to the 1930s. The only people claiming it's "extralegal" have financial interests in crypto. Here: https://www.fdic.gov/news/inactive-financial-institution-letters/2022/fil22016.html https://www.fdic.gov/news/inactive-financial-institution-let... . They issue the same kinds of advisories for foreign currencies, subprime assets, penny stocks, etc. That authority is no different than the authority granted to the FDA, FTC, etc. and it's got decades of case law behind it. > I don't like that. I want to be able to question USAID and what my president is doing. What they're doing is actually the opposite of what you say. If you listen to what Horowitz is saying, he's stating these "theories" as if they're well-known facts, preemptively shutting down questioning about his motives or the veracity of his sources. Saying things like "Everybody now knows Biden was not actually the president" is not questioning, it's a classic propaganda tactic called "Card Stacking", where someone trusted or with authority presents speculation or half truths as fact, ignoring contradictory evidence or uncertainty to manipulate public opinion. The USAID statements are another example: USAID supplies & money may have been used by terrorists, against the anti-terrorism provisions written into its charter. The mission of USAID, however, was to stop terrorism from springing up in the first place by reducing food insecurity in unstable places. You know what else directly funds terrorism? Cryptocurrency (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-hamas-terrorist-financing-scheme-through-seizure-cryptocurrency https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-h...). But you don't hear Horowitz say we should ban Crypto over it. He's using half truths to promote his financial interests and legitimize his support for those in power who promote these interests. Yet another example is how he promotes blockchain for USG spending, as if the USG doesn't have extremely detailed records of how money moves and is spent. Here's an article about the "lost" $400B: https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78 https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-sma... Key points: Much of the waste is fraud by organizations requesting relief money. The gov't knows who got the money and is prosecuting over 1000 people over it. The waste happened because of lax oversight by the first Trump administration during campaign season, not during the Biden administration as implied by Horowitz. Finally, it was probably not due to nefarious intentions (despite campaign season), but due to the extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic.

by ghc 1y ago

chermi 1y ago

You ignored the entire issue. It was extralegal. If they wanted to do something about it, they should make clear laws and enforce them. And to add, I would say what you're doing is basically trying to forbid thought and discussion about what USAID has done or the Biden situation by tying it to something so reprehensible no one will want to associate with it. I don't like that. I want to be able to question USAID and what my president is doing. Stick to rebutting the actual ideas, it's a much healthier way to engage. Edit-- I agree fascist label is wild, but can we admit there might be some hmm, fairly recent precedence for wild and often offensive use of terms like fascist and Nazi?

ghc 1y ago
> You ignored the entire issue. It was extralegal. If they wanted to do something about it, they should make clear laws and enforce them. That's actually not true. The SEC & FDIC have broad authority to issue recommendations regarding risk. There are clear laws on the books dating back to the 1930s. The only people claiming it's "extralegal" have financial interests in crypto. Here: https://www.fdic.gov/news/inactive-financial-institution-letters/2022/fil22016.html https://www.fdic.gov/news/inactive-financial-institution-let... . They issue the same kinds of advisories for foreign currencies, subprime assets, penny stocks, etc. That authority is no different than the authority granted to the FDA, FTC, etc. and it's got decades of case law behind it. > I don't like that. I want to be able to question USAID and what my president is doing. What they're doing is actually the opposite of what you say. If you listen to what Horowitz is saying, he's stating these "theories" as if they're well-known facts, preemptively shutting down questioning about his motives or the veracity of his sources. Saying things like "Everybody now knows Biden was not actually the president" is not questioning, it's a classic propaganda tactic called "Card Stacking", where someone trusted or with authority presents speculation or half truths as fact, ignoring contradictory evidence or uncertainty to manipulate public opinion. The USAID statements are another example: USAID supplies & money may have been used by terrorists, against the anti-terrorism provisions written into its charter. The mission of USAID, however, was to stop terrorism from springing up in the first place by reducing food insecurity in unstable places. You know what else directly funds terrorism? Cryptocurrency (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-hamas-terrorist-financing-scheme-through-seizure-cryptocurrency https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-h...). But you don't hear Horowitz say we should ban Crypto over it. He's using half truths to promote his financial interests and legitimize his support for those in power who promote these interests. Yet another example is how he promotes blockchain for USG spending, as if the USG doesn't have extremely detailed records of how money moves and is spent. Here's an article about the "lost" $400B: https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78 https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-sma... Key points: Much of the waste is fraud by organizations requesting relief money. The gov't knows who got the money and is prosecuting over 1000 people over it. The waste happened because of lax oversight by the first Trump administration during campaign season, not during the Biden administration as implied by Horowitz. Finally, it was probably not due to nefarious intentions (despite campaign season), but due to the extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic.