There are many new entrants in the crypto ecosystem yearning for regulations and praising government. More folks with these notions emerge regularly. They believe regulatory oversight is necessary to provide crypto with a sense of “respectability.”
For these individuals, political involvement in crypto is a foregone conclusion. However, they forget that regulation is a threat of harm concealed by fancy rhetoric.
Regulation stifles innovation and chokes the entrepreneurial spirit. It is antithetical to the technological imagination and it is wholly uncivilized. The crypto industry must ultimately reject regulations and work toward embracing self-governance models. They must begin paving the path toward freedom. That is true “respectability.”
Mainstream Erotica at Crypto Conferences
I attend a lot of cryptocurrency conferences. As the communications ambassador for bitcoin.com, I speak on many panels with other professionals. I have had the opportunity to witness our ecosystem evolve and change and suffer. I have seen the crypto-anarchist dream eroded by mainstream erotica; the erotica of violence and barbarism. These sycophants have brought their love of politics and worship of government into a traditionally anti-government space.
Some of this infiltration is expected. As a technology and community grows, it tends to absorb the most deeply embedded aspects of the dominant culture. This means people from the legacy financial system and various political sectors will begin to influence the space with their antiquated, violent ideas. It is already happening.
Blind Trust in Rules and Regulations
At the most recent event I attended in Las Vegas, called World Crypto Con, I was on a panel about crypto adoption. At one point of the discussion, the moderator asked the gentleman next to me if he trusted government to issue currency and handle the economy.
Without missing a beat, he said, “yes, I trust them.”
He went on to explain the importance of having more government in our space to provide it with more respectability and allow cryptocurrency to continue growing and spreading. He made this non-argument just after I explained how governments devalue currency and use inflation to initiate silent theft on the population.
Selling out with Stablecoins
Another member of the panel works for a company called Stronghold that tried to put the U.S. dollar on the blockchain in the form of a stablecoin. She made the case that crypto must be attached to the dollar to gain respectability and be ready for mass adoption.
However, that is not the purpose of cryptocurrency. Connecting it to the legacy system is backwards. It is akin to throwing away a decade of innovation in order to capitulate to the broken system. It is delirium and madness. I call it selling out, and it takes a certain lack of courage to travel down this route.
Keeping the Ecosystem on Track
What I have experienced is still just my personal experience. It is not absolute evidence of what’s happening in our space, but I believe a glance at the common language used across our industry provides evidence of devolution into mainstream politicking. In this sense, the industry needs two things to happen in order to get the ecosystem back on track:
Anarchist and libertarian leaders and role models. The cryptocurrency space needs more entrepreneurs who are willing to work in the space on principle rather than just for the purpose of earning a fortune. Making money is great, as I have said elsewhere, but in order to truly better our way of life and move blockchain tech forward, the values of freedom must be promoted regularly. This will help keep the detritus from congealing within the industry and engineering a poisonous environment.
Mass Adoption. Speaking on liberty an freedom is not enough, though. More importantly, everyone in the space should also be racing to spread cryptocurrency far and wide. It’s not some random and sketchy blockchain product that is the killer application for the technology. Cryptocurrency is the killer app. And it is the conduit through which people will realize their freedom. If the technology is not massively accepted across society, it is likely the ecosystem will continue to breed pseudo-entrepreneurs who loathe freedom. They will be the ones interested in perpetuating Ponzi schemes and selling multilevel marketing gimmicks. This is why also I spend a lot of my time setting up crypto wallets and giving away free bitcoin cash.
The truth is the tech is just a tool. The cypherpunks created it to provide the individual with more freedom, privacy and autonomy. That is true. However, people can still wield it to hurt others. That is not what the industry wants or needs. In order to push the community forward, everyone must embrace self-governance.
Self-governance is the realization that the community possesses the tools to govern itself. It does not needs gods or masters. Bureaucrats do not have the acumen or integrity to make decisions for blockchain participants. Members of the community now have the technology to weed out bad actors and promote a healthy, thriving ecosystem.
The crypto community must be diligent, though. Mainstream erotica is all-pervasive. The political mentality pulses with life in all the streets and alleys of modern culture; and like a spreading plague, it will exploit weaknesses in the body of society in order to thoroughly infect it.
Rigidly maintaining the self-governance mentality is thus the only way to combat politics and create a truly peaceful and civilized world.
Do you believe we can oust government and create an ecosystem of self-governance? Is government necessary at all?
Images courtesy of Shutterstock.
OP-ed disclaimer: This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com does not endorse nor support views, opinions or conclusions drawn in this post. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.