Is the dire political judgement of the people voluntarily involved in Bitcoin really necessary? Bitcoin may very well be a complete failure, or a flawed idea, o

Is the dire political judgement of the people voluntarily involved in Bitcoin really necessary? Bitcoin may very well be a complete failure, or a flawed idea, or practically against its own goals, or whatever you want. And that would actually be an interesting article to read. But why must it be necessary to then further portray those honestly interested in it as delusional or perhaps downright malicious? The idea that macro economics is "figured out" has been debunked countless times. Both sides can cherry-pick examples ad-infinitum and call the other side ridiculous. Anyone who thinks they firmly know "why" a certain recession happened is suffering from ignorance of their own ignorance in my opinion. Clearly something isn't working right today if 2008 happened, and not to mention how the very economic policies we consider so great for us here domestically often have incredibly ill effects on third world countries. It's a hard, complex problem, and I've frankly given up on solutions that require as a premise that everyone else shut up and do exactly what you say. Perhaps you believe that social problems can't be solved through technology. That is an acceptable and even admirable belief, but why should that stop me from having a different belief? One of the nice things about our society is that different people can try different strategies. Some people think that the way to reduce car deaths or prevent drunk driving (a clear social problem) is through education and stricter laws. Honest and valuable social strategy. However, others think you can accomplish it technologically by making cars that drive themselves and avoiding the problem altogether. There's no reason we can't try both and not politically demonize the other side (I'd remind you that suggesting a car that drives itself in the 50s as a solution to drunk driving would have probably had you labeled a nut -- that doesn't mean we should have hung any AI researchers out to dry for working on the beginnings of such a system). The worst part about this is how he immediately considers anyone who believes in this as removed from reality. Why assume the worst of people you clearly have not met all of. I don't know OP's past, but I can tell you that my parents are from foreign country that has experienced hyperinflation in a very real way. Many of my feelings are a result of this: precisely because I feel hyperinflation is more real to me (and obviously more real to my parents) than someone whose entire family is from the United States and has only ever heard about it as a curiosity from Zimbabwe that they can refer to at a cocktail party. I see hyperinflation as a real problem -- just because it doesn't happen in the US doesn't mean it doesn't exist or is a fantasy. I very much believe that BTC offers the first real alternative for people trapped in countries where they can't get USD in or out during these events. And yes, this may mean it would circumvent that country's regulations: but even if you think the US government is doing things for the betterment of its population, I can guarantee you that's not the case everywhere else. Now you may disagree and think the right strategy is a different one involving the UN or the World Bank perhaps. That's fine, but please don't extrapolate that into a personal judgement of my character.