The Vote that Matters

There was a vote in the the EU today that was shoehorned in at the last moment, on a topic looking to limit PoW cryptos due to environmental "sustainability". Thankfully, it was rejected, but it won't be long until people who don't understand the technology, attempt to kill it because it isn't in their interest for it to survive.

Like any corporation, governments don't care about the people that they govern, they are only interested in maintaining control. And part of that control is financial shackling, keeping people bound through the currencies they use and, what they can use it on. After all, no government wants people to spend on what is not approved.

Funny really, considering that Ukraine has taken in over 100M in crypto donations so far that has helped them buy weapons and supplies in an attempt to repel Russian forces. That is a significant amount of freedom, isn't it? What happens if people get fed up with economic slavery and decide to band together and use their crypto to fund an army to help free themselves? This is the problem with self-managed and controlled finances that can't just be cut off, they can be used in ways that the government will not want.

As I see it and many might disagree, financial control is more important than gun control and has far more of an impact. In the US for example, rather than fighting for the right to bear arms, people should be fighting for the right to own their own currencies, because once that happens, they become actual decision makers and then, can make the decision as a decentralized group to bear arms anyway.

However, when we do not own and control our own wealth, we become beggars to the state, asking the people we fund for the right to do things, that we are quite capable of handling as individuals. I know, this sounds crazy, but I am quite certain that under a world of decentralized financial ownership and control, wars at any scale will be near impossible to wage, as before anything can escalate that far, it would be defunded.

Essentially, what is happening through the sanctions and asset freezes on Russia at the moment, is that they are getting defunded at a global level. However, while many might agree with this in this circumstance, turn the tables slightly and things change - for example, what if it was China and the EU sanctioning the US similarly? Or China and the US sanctioning the EU? Things get uncomfortable.

It is the economic equivalent of the nuclear option and while it might not kill a mass of people immediately, don't for a moment think that innocent people aren't going to die from it - if they aren't already. That is a lot of power to be in the hands of just a few, isn't it?

In a decentralized economy though, this power doesn't exist in the hands of the few, as it takes many to defund. However, just like the donations that are moving into Ukraine, people would still support causes they believe in. But, a lot of what countries fight over, wouldn't be an issue, because when everyone has ownership, the "state" no longer becomes a controlling force in the same sense as it does now, where nationalism is used as a way to control and direct activity of the people.

So much of the "border" is only relevant because of the economic systems involved. However, once there is global decentralized currencies, it becomes a true free market economy, which means that the importance of national borders diminishes greatly. Of course, people fear this, because we are taught to identify with where we were born, a nationality, a culture and if the borders disappear, who do I become, what am I?

It is interesting isn't it? That we define ourselves based on a line on a map, a fence, a body of water that says, I am this, they are that. Culture doesn't care for such things and I suspect that I have a lot in common with a lot of people around the world and the major differences between me and a "foreign culture" could also be found between me and someone born the same nationality as myself.

I am proud, because I was born between these two imaginary lines.

Seems a bit silly, doesn't it?

Something to go to war over, kill people over?

Yet, this is what happens, because we are conditioned to defend our identity, even if the identity we are defending is baseless and not indicative of who we are at all. But, what a way to control people and get them to do what you want them to do! How easy is it to unite under a flag to fight a common enemy? And while we defend our identity, the uniting forces are increasing their stake in the control they have over us.

Does this make for an awkward conversation?

Perhaps.

But I believe it is something that we have to think about, because everyone acts under incentive of some kind, but governments and corporations almost entirely act under financial incentive. It is the economy that they are driven by, which is why they do not want us to have control over the economy, because if we do, we control them and when that happens, we will not force them to do our bidding, we will defund them, and they will just disappear into irrelevance.

This doesn't mean governance won't happen, it is just that we will have the power to unite groups of decision makers and, disband them on the fly, meaning that in order for them to have power, we need to provide it. Stake it, Delegate it and then they will have to prove they will use it in our best interest - or they will lose the delegation. Currently though, they have our economic stake - but they also hold all the keys.

Well, almost all.