December 21, 2017 – Fort Russ News – Paul Antonopoulos – Translated from Nova Resistencia.
Rio de Janeiro – The blindness of speculators – combined with Brazilian social despair – is so great, that whenever you speak about Bitcoin, a lot of people can’t even tell if you’re talking to an audience of investors or if you’re talking from a social and political perspective.
We will deal here with Bitcoin in your social and political function, that is, this is not a text about how you can get rich or about Bitcoin being advantageous, or not, from the point of view of the investments. If that’s all you care about, don’t waste your time here:
The Original Bitcoin Proposal was to serve as an alternative currency. Initially, it actually featured common features with alternative currencies, such as the fact that it was created for the use of people with little purchasing power – in the case, people who, in general, fell into the profile “nerd antisocial”, which depended on from their parent s’ allowance and they used it in exchange of services and products with each other, thereby creating savings in the currency in which they would receive their allowance (in the case of dollars).
Bitcoin thus took a ride in the hype of “shared economies”, selling a promise of alternative to government official coins. At some point, however, instead of an alternative currency (for the use of “Nerds Nerds”), the coin became a speculator role, and the buyer of Bitcoin, as well as its apologists, today, already has a completely distinct profile from the original users. This is nothing new, that is, something to come up with the underground aura and turn into mainstream, having its commercial use spread by large corporations. In part, the rhetoric ‘Anti’ is guilty of this, because it does not question the actions of private entities, while in the real world it is those large private financial entities that have always been behind several crises – crises that , apparently, they will migrate to portfolios in 2018. and then, when large financial institutions and banks join the currency, it will be regulated by governments that do not allow the collapse of these banks or financial institutions.
Funding a new American bubble with external savings?
The 2008 crisis is linked to real estate speculation in the United States. Real Estate was purchased under the expectation of being valued tomorrow. In this logic, simply exchange “owning real estate in the USA” by “owning bitcoins” to see a similar script. The Hyper-appreciation made different titles, linked to this market, were used as trading currency in derivatives markets (Futures markets) and of debts: Destiny That Bitcoin is taking, at this very moment, with the entry of big financial institutions in this market. Already this bitcoin race coincides with the rise of interest in the United States by Donald Trump, and other measures to attract external savings. Trump also removed financial market regulation mechanisms created in the Obama era.
Deregulation for what?
The 2008 crisis was anticipated by the major deregulation of the financial markets by the Bush administration. And Bitcoin, according to its fans, is free of regulation. However, we know that the markets for derivatives/credits prime, which generated the 2008 crisis, were highly deregulated.
Big financial institutions and speculators have caused the crisis – those who now migrate to Bitcoin.
Differences Between Bitcoin and real alternative currencies:
(a) in real alternative currencies, use of the same for the purchase and sale of goods between a community and, the more that is done, the less Brazilian currenct, the Real (R$), are used, thus creating a saving in the country’s official currency and increasing purchasing power in both currencies. There is Real left in the community, which are used by people to buy products and services not produced by that community: the community itself becomes richer. Already in the (b) Bitcoin, people a, b and c do not exchange bitcoins between themselves via purchase of products and services, but are limited to selling and buying on dollar: the increase in purchasing power depends on the very growth of the bubble and the Expectation of future growth: this is the “enrichment” of Bitcoin, which does not generate community value. If a number of people in the same community acquire bitcoins, there is no saving of the official currency of their countries, but on the contrary, it creates deficit.
Community Ties and crime:
(a) in the experiences of alternative currencies, community ties are strengthened. The increase in commercial activity generates jobs and the largest volume of inter-community commercial transactions strengthens and creates new local social links: the community becomes “getting to know better”. This cycle of ” Virtuosity ” and the generation of jobs reduces crime as a whole, there is an incentive for participation in the local economy and therefore social inclusion. (b) in the case of Bitcoin, its fans are seen as competitors, one against each other, increasing the tendency to secrecy, assuming that control and possession of information are vital to merchants of content. Anyone who has ever dealt with real estate brokers can quickly understand the similarity of the profile with professional speculators. Anyone who does not join the profile will be a loser in this race. It does not create community value, but a war of everyone against everyone, as well as the division between losers and winners. There is a flirtation with contraband, money laundering and illicit uses (in the absence of a better word).
(a) the social development and improvement of the quality of life in the communities adopting parallel currencies is remarkable. (b) in the case of Bitcoin, there was no news yet from the neighborhood, community or country that has its social development linked to the acquisition of bitcoins.
Interest and circulation: (a) alternative currencies are as goal as possible, thus allowing the creation of savings of other currencies and values. Your interest is kept low and accumulation is discouraged: the more the community uses, the better. It is not attractive for use in the form of loans, since scarcity control is not in the hands of individual speculators, but in the hands of the community bank. (b) in the case of bitcoins, these tend to be used in the future on scrolling of debts, derivatives markets (future markets). Now, obviously, a “currency” that only values if it is used in loans will have interest at times. Their circulation is discouraged and no one will ever pay wages with bitcoins.
(a) in the alternative currencies, the largest winners are local micro-Traders Who, in turn, have seen the largest job generators. The alternative currency of these communities encouraged circulation rather than accumulation. The accumulation occurs in the “External” currency to the community, in the case the real (R$). (b) in bitcoins, the winners are a minority of large speculators who hold a large percentage of ownership of these coins and handle it with mastery in the purchase cycles And sell.
Production and myth of trickle-down:
(a) Traders and industrialists living in communities using alternative community currencies are always talking about continuing or expanding business. (b) they are expected to stop working. Those who earn money, think of using that money to reapplication in bitcoins: it is speculation by speculation in itself, a market of content.
Bitcoin, from a political point of view, is another demonstration of the failure of libertarian illusions, Anarcho-capitalist and liberals. Deregulation goes hand-in-hand with speculation. Financial speculation renders community and social use of any kind of value in the case of currency. Having value just because it has value in itself, in certain sectors (such as banks), does not go anywhere and, in many cases, it leads even to the stagnation of the economy, depending on where the final investments are directed.