Bitcoin has experienced tremendous growth over the past fifteen years since its inception, and with it has come numerous monumental shifts in the culture of the overall ecosystem as well as the smaller individual communities that comprise it. This is of course something to be expected, as the network grew from a small niche thing in a corner of the internet to a global phenomenon that is now becoming a serious political issue across the globe.
Bitcoin is no longer a little niche thing in a corner, or a toy that only a few autistic nerds tinker with, it is a global economic asset and monetary network that moves billions of dollars around the world every day. Things have changed in the process of that growth, of course, but I think that shifting has come with substantial negative consequences.
There has always been a perceived libertarian or right-wing slant to Bitcoin. Some of the early users and communities that formed around Bitcoin were based on libertarian philosophy, and it makes sense when you look at it from a theoretical perspective. Libertarianism is ostensibly about the individual claiming and maintaining their own freedom and independence in their life. But that wasn’t the only group of people, or the only philosophy, that was present early on in Bitcoin’s history.
Many people came to Bitcoin through left-wing movements like Occupy Wall Street, the massive protest movement that arose in response to the same Great Financial Crisis that gave birth to Bitcoin itself. They too saw the need to get the banks out of the global economy, after the disastrous results of their reckless and irresponsible gambling with the savings and investments of ordinary people in order to run the economy. They too saw the need to wrest control of that economy from the governments that selectively deregulated it in order to enable that gambling in the first place.
Both groups came here for the same reasons, disintermediation. Removing mega banks and governments as the middlemen involved in everyone’s financial transactions, hell, the workings of the global economy as a whole. But in the collective cultural mind, it’s libertarianism, the right wing of the political spectrum, that has become widely associated with Bitcoin.
The problem is that most of them don’t actually live up to their proclaimed beliefs.
Bitcoin was designed to be an open, non-intermediate system that anyone can use. I’m not speaking from a technological standpoint, people reading this will understand that Bitcoin needs limitations on a technological level to maintain the decentralization that gives it value in the first place, and that compromising those limitations is a death blow. I’m speaking from a philosophical standpoint.
On a technical level, scaling Bitcoin to be as open to as many people as possible is an ongoing challenge, and will remain so for the foreseeable future, if not forever. These are limitations imposed by the nature of the technology.
On a human and personal level, Bitcoin requires no constraints. It is an open voluntary system of consensus, the nature and function of which are entirely defined by that voluntary consensus created by the opt-in interactions of all of its users and participants. Many so-called libertarians are seemingly deeply offended and unnerved by this.
The actions of a large part of the active community, at least online, are diametrically opposed to the principles of libertarianism. Freedom, independence, and voluntary interaction. Many right-wing or libertarian Bitcoiners encourage the opposite of that, bullying and intimidating and pushing people to adopt their worldview.
Their actions demonstrate conformism and pressure to act a certain way or believe certain things, rather than respect for individual choices and beliefs that differ from their own. They attempt to make the idea of being a Bitcoiner, or even being involved with Bitcoin, seem like an adherence to their beliefs and worldview. They engage in constant shaming campaigns, which in many cases border on or even escalate into intimidation, to try to enforce this equivalence of their worldview with “being a Bitcoiner.”
While I don’t believe this is actually the dominant attitude of people in the space, it is absolutely dominant in some sub-communities and is absolutely the perceived dominant attitude in public on internet platforms. And it is in complete contradiction to the espoused beliefs of libertarianism, individual freedom and respect, and self-determination in how people choose to live their lives.
The only place I actually see the actions, not the words, of individuals who reflect such beliefs is (I’m sure this is ironic to some readers) on the left. Progressive and left-leaning Bitcoiners seem to be the only ones willing to meaningfully engage with people who think or see the world radically differently, without shaming or pressuring people to adopt their own worldviews. They are the people who are working to open a path to adoption for people with diverse beliefs and backgrounds, different needs, and trying to ensure that Bitcoin can help as many people as possible.
In contrast, right-wing Bitcoiners tend to shame, attack, and discourage people who have a different view of the world than they do. They typically scoff at any attempt to address such people’s needs or problems with Bitcoin. The common catchphrase or response is, “Bitcoin isn’t for everyone.” Or, “Poor people will never use Bitcoin themselves.” It embodies an “I’ve got mine, so pull the ladder up behind me” attitude about things.
It is usually couched in a stance of technical arguments, but the vast majority of people making such claims generally do not articulate a coherent technical reasoning for such a “forget about those people” argument. They appeal to fear and uncertainty to bolster their arguments, rather than expressing coherent and articulate technical concerns.
Many of these people embrace and wrap themselves in fantasies of power, wealth, and influence. They tell themselves that because they were “smart enough” to buy bitcoin early, they deserve such a position in the world, and others who weren’t “smart enough” don’t. It’s almost a fetish to become the people Bitcoin is supposed to remove from all of our lives.
Yes, Bitcoin has technical limitations. And yes, that almost certainly doesn’t mean that third parties will be completely removed from our lives, but that doesn’t mean it’s something to embrace and defend. Something to revel in by thinking of yourself as that middleman, or waving your hand and magically saying “the market will fix this” and pretending that governments don’t exist, always looking for new private entities to subjugate and turn into delegated lackeys exercising control over our financial transactions and lives.
Speaking of government interference in markets, this is another thing that right-wing Bitcoiners compromise on in terms of principle. Excusing, or even outright encouraging, the creeping influence on services and products in this space, while simultaneously attacking anything that tries to escape enforcement or regulation. It’s a state of cognitive dissonance, where the market is fully relied upon to magically prevent “poor” Bitcoiners from being abused and exploited in the same way the financial system is, while pretending that the very existence of Bitcoin prevents the government from forcing large private actors to act as the enforcement arm in that abuse.
Whenever community custody solutions like ecash or other systems built on Lightning are discussed that can be operated in a cost-effective but not very centralized (at least in scale) way in places like Africa, they are ridiculed. They are portrayed as scams waiting to happen, or completely unworkable solutions, while at the same time critics hop around as if Bitcoin will magically win. As if there are no problems with making it more widely accessible in a way that scales to provide a way to use it without those risks for more people.
I got mine, so fuck you.
The libertarians in Bitcoin, for the most part, have completely lost the thread of what it was originally designed to do. To disrupt people’s financial lives. They applaud Wall Street influence, politicians’ sycophancy, and the growing institutionalization of the entire system as progress.
“We will now take our places at the table, do not disturb the game!”
They no longer care about uplifting people as a whole, or ensuring that everyone has the freedom to experiment and live their lives as they wish, to structure their communities and societies as they wish, on the basis of a neutral, unmediated system. They cheer for conformity, homogeneity, bending to their worldview. They see Bitcoin as a way to bend the world to their beliefs, their will, their way of life. It is no longer seen by most as a framework for diverse experimentation and differentiation.
It’s the progressives, the leftists, those who came in through avenues like Occupy Wall Street, who still seem to care about making Bitcoin the best it can be for everyone. It’s time for that to be recognized and for people to shake off the parasitic pressure to conform.
For the nerds who get the reference, infinite diversity in infinite combinations. That’s what Bitcoin should be.