Hi Erik, I agree with you that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general have been the test case for upcoming programmable CBDCs, which will result in the greatest loss of freedom in human history. However, the specific mechanism that the NSA/CIA use to control the crypto space is via the flimsy Tether scam, which has more trading volume than the top ten coins *combined*. Tether is meant to be 1:1 with USD, but the evidence shows that Tether is a giant ponzi scheme and the vast majority of Tether are simply printed out of thin air and shoved into the crypto space, massively inflating it. Our elites can crash the entire crypto market in a single second by taking out Tether, and/or cutting off the fiat on/offramps like via CIA/NSA controlled scam Coinbase. See here for more: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/misconceptions-regarding-viewing
Spot on :) Tether is the easiest kill switch for the entire crypto market. Its unbacked USDT has been the primary tool for artificially inflating Bitcoin’s price, and the fact that regulators haven’t touched it tells us it’s still serving its purpose. When it’s no longer useful, pulling the plug on Tether (or cutting off on/off ramps like Coinbase) would collapse the entire space overnight - pushing people toward the ‘solution’ they always intended: CBDCs and full-spectrum financial control. When doing these longer peices I tend to always forget some crucial aspect which the perfectionist in me hates. But there's a lot more to know to complete the picture. Thanks for the links, will dig in!
FedNOW is the CBDC payment rail but there’s little indication they want to run it themselves.
The game has shifted from .gov-administered CBDC to “public-private partnership,” at least in the US.
The stablecoins themselves will build a backbone of alleged “free market” options. Howard Lutnick gets Tether, Peter Thiel gets PYUSD, Larry Summers at Circle/Coinbase get USDC. Plans could always change but I don't think they want to pull the plug on these operations - they want them to be the public-facing CBDC without having to call it CBDC.
Even the flimsy public balance sheets of USDT, COIN, and other entities wrapped up in this are piling into long-dated Treasurys, indicating further that they intend to use existing stablecoin infrastructure to backstop existing US debt and roll the new financial system.
Everything is in place now so the carrots and sticks will come fast. DOGE floating the idea of $5k stimulus checks is a likely beta test.
Our elites want, wherever possible, the public to consent to it's own enslavement. Whether it's due to an occult reason - if the public doesn't object then it's like they asset to it, which makes the elite not responsible for the evils they inflict in their minds - or if it's due to practical realities, i.e. it much easier and cheaper to use soft power versus hard power, or a combination, I agree with you that things are currently shaping up for this gross and disgusting public-private partnership based in retarded stablecoins. I would really not be surprised for some nominal payment like $5,000 to be used to get the public to voluntarily assent to this horrific nonsense.
Consent is essential. It always has been and is more than abundantly evident.
Free will must be exercised for the transaction to be completed.
This speaks to the wisdom of God.
A time is approaching and all signs say rapidly approaching, when people will choose between this world and the next.
Between the life of the material and the life of the Spirit.
I think all these complicated shenanigans are to confuse those without a solid foundation. Though a warning was issued that even those with discernment will find these tricky times to navigate if the mind is allowed to rule.
It's simple if you follow the Spirit. Though not necessarily easy.
I think this is why they always choose manioulation over straight force - because of the inherent free will aspect of creation. We have to choose our own enslavement, it cannot be forced upon us unless we accept our chains. I agree, it feels like we are rapidly approaching some sort of turning point, what lies beyond it - who knows - but it’s going to be a hell of a ride.
I once invested in Bitcoin, not much. Then I started thinking about it and researching it, and figured out the alleged freedom was still controlled by onramps and offramps. I could hold it as long as I wanted but in order to cash in I still had to use the financial institutions I was led to believe I had freedom from. Bitcoiners are a cult, and Bitcoin is their god.
The irony here is that in the short term (next several years), everything you describe will only drive the price up. Obviously this is playing with fire but is it possible to be invested in BTC but not support it long term?
Yes definately, now this is where there is no easy answer. Same with the AI question. Can we in the interim use it to our benefit to grow the resistance against the thing were trying to fight - or is that a part of the trap? It's the allure of "easy money" and "higher productivity" and it will sound so alluring.
But as, I beleive it was Tucker Max who once said; "The devil doesn't come dressed in red and pointy horns, he comes dressed as everything you ever wished for.
I’ll admit I was caught by the hype back in 2016 and believed strongly in the decentralized cryptocurrency future of banking. It also helped that I was living outside the US at the time, in a country with very minimal cryptocurrency regulation. I loved the feeling of anonymity and freedom it gave me. It really did make me open my eyes and rethink the nature of global finance, and that was and is a good thing, as it also lead to a deeper understanding of the corrupt financial / banking system and the highly manipulated markets. From 2016 to 2022 I saw the freedom and anonymity slowly and steadily being sucked out of the crypto space and the slow creep of centralization and elite money master co-opting. Now that sufficient AI has “arrived” they have the perfect brain to manage the financial panopticon.
Another thing that’s been on my mind is how they have continually replaced real life and physical interactions and objects with ephemeral digital substitutes -social media, online culture, virtual worlds, screen addiction, community breakdown etc…this is just the further breakdown of money into something even more intangible, worthless and fake. They work tirelessly to gobble up all hard physical assets while diverting and denying them all to us.
Sorry for the long retort but this is sort of our wheel house, as early adopters and proponents of decentralization and transparency in all systems.
First we want to clarify that Bitcoin never promised this: "The Nakamoto paradox is this: a system designed to free us from financial surveillance." The white papers only stated that the core goal of Bitcoin was to provide a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" that would allow people to transact directly with each other without needing a trusted third party, like a bank. It was made to free us from centralized bank control. Permissionless money. And it delivered here.
Today, if you tried to send a lot of money to Japan or Australia you would need permission. Try getting on a plane with $100k in cash or gold. A wire transfer or check or credit card requires permission. Bitcoin does not.
As for some of the other concerns in the article, there are reasonable concerns. But not without some clarity.
While Bitcoin has evolved, it still offers a decentralized structure compared to traditional financial systems controlled by central banks. It remains resistant to government manipulation, even if certain aspects are more centralized than originally envisioned.
Bitcoin’s transparency is a double-edged sword. While it's true that transactions are visible on the blockchain, this transparency is often mischaracterized as an effective surveillance tool. In reality, pseudonymity and privacy tools (like CoinJoin and Lightning Network) allow users to obscure their identities. Also, use COLD wallets to store your stash.
Satoshi’s ability to craft a technically perfect system does not imply external interference. The skills needed to create Bitcoin were not as rare as you might think, especially given that open-source cryptography and cryptographic models were already available. Also, while the NSA did develop the SHA-256 algorithm, it is widely used in cryptographic systems and is not a unique fingerprint for surveillance. The use of established cryptographic methods in Bitcoin doesn't imply an intentional surveillance agenda. Unless you have more info that would be new news. The involvement of prominent figures and groups like the PayPal Mafia with Bitcoin is often overstated. These actors were early adopters but did not dictate Bitcoin’s design or goals. Bitcoin’s open-source nature allows anyone to participate, and its development was led by a diverse global community.
While mining pools dominate a significant portion of the hash rate, Bitcoin is still more decentralized than traditional financial systems. Efforts to increase decentralization, such as the development of alternative mining mechanisms and layer 2 solutions, continue to evolve. Bitcoin’s development is not as centralized as suggested. While key developers do influence the codebase, Bitcoin's open-source nature means anyone can propose changes. The BIP process is transparent and community-driven, and large-scale changes are typically the result of broad consensus. The role of exchanges and custodians is an unfortunate reality of mainstream adoption, but they are not an inherent flaw in Bitcoin itself. Bitcoin can still be used outside centralized exchanges with the proper tools (e.g., self-custody and decentralized exchanges).
The argument that Bitcoin leads to total surveillance ignores the growing privacy-focused developments within the ecosystem, such as privacy coins, CoinJoin, and zk-SNARKs. Bitcoin transactions can be analyzed, but true financial surveillance requires not just data access but also identification, which is much harder to achieve.
Palantir is highly concerning. Agree there. But what is their play besides trying to track and analyze data?
Bitcoin's reframing as "digital gold" is not necessarily an act of co-option; it may be a strategic evolution in response to market demands and investor interest. The counter point is the Corrupters (the elites) realized Bitcoin was going forward with or without them, so they joined the party as to not look foolish. Do they want control? Of course Blackrock and Vanguard want control. But Bitcoin is the largest network in the history of MANKIND. It's not so easy.
Is Bitcoin bullet proof? Maybe not. But as you concluded it makes humanity talk about the right things. Decentralization. Transparency. And better systems without authority controlling us as gatekeepers.
Also, another paradox. If we can see all transactions, then why don't we put all government spending on the transparent ledger? If it is a trap for us it can be a trap for them as well.
Transparency, after all, is the solution for corruption.
What is easily debunked? Can you please use full coherent sentences if you care to disagree? This kind of emotional name calling to end a discussion is a tactic of the far left, even though the right has now adopted "black pilled" as one of their own. "Maxi cope" is about on par with "conspiracy theorist" "trust the science" or "fake news" (all of which get slung our way daily).
Isn't this a page for thinkers and those not afraid of a culture of criticism?
We agree with the wariness of the author. And he may be right about some things. But he left out some important things we wanted to highlight.
The only thing we are "maxi" about is better systems that are harder to corrupt.
It might be new to you, though, because you clearly weren't around back then and haven't questioned any of the underlying presuppositions the book presents.
You're still holding water for L2 vaporware that will never solve the NP Hard^2 Traveling Salesman's Dilemma (even Lightning's creator admits this and left the project as a result), clear-cut intelligence agency and NGO involvement in SegWit (some of whom, like Peter Todd, were Core developers), the absolutely laughable state of BIP pull requests for even minor architectural changes, and a bevy of other fantasies.
I was very fortunate to have a front-row seat working at a crypto company whose name you would know and is now a large publicly traded entity when all this was going on. Non-zero odds that your UTXOs have touched my code at some point. Be thankful that Roger Ver and others put pen to paper for those of you who weren't paying attention back then, he's in jail now because of it.
You should actually read the book sometime. You're robbing yourself of a tremendous amount of context by continuing to peddle a dead duck cypherpunk narrative that anyone with technical ability or geopolitical understanding abandoned long ago.
Or don't. Again, you're a True Believer. Nothing anyone says will change your mind.
Dismissing the entire argument as "vaporware" without addressing the core principles only weakens your position. Bitcoin, at its core, offers a system that is decentralized, transparent, and resistant to censorship. No matter how flawed certain aspects or participants may be, that’s still a significant improvement over centralized institutions. The fact that people are still pushing forward improvements—whether you agree with them or not—proves that the ecosystem is constantly evolving. And as for the claims of corruption or geopolitical involvement, no system is perfect, but that doesn’t invalidate the foundational value of the technology. The question is not whether Bitcoin is flawless, but whether it offers a more resilient alternative to the broken systems we currently rely on. Disregarding the progress and potential of the broader crypto ecosystem is a disservice to real innovation. And there is nothing to believe except results.
Show clearly how it is corrupted by corrupting it.
I describe how the project for world domination has been advancing, slowly but steadily, for 500 years. Its present leaders have a vast experience in developing financial and other systems. I show that they are totally ruthless and extremely cunning, and that they were the organizers of the world wars and communist revolutions, with 200 million victims in the 20th century alone.
From the lessons learned it was impossible to assume that a new, ambitious and independent financial system like bitcoin would escape their control. Now you confirmed it! Thanks for your great contribution to "knowing your enemy"!
By the way, I share the critique on your suggestion in a previous paper that the tech billionaires are behind this: they are just the errand boys of the great dynastic families pulling the strings from behind the scenes.
'Bitcoin may not be the flawless solution many hoped for, but it has ignited a global conversation about sovereignty, freedom, and decentralization - and that spark cannot be extinguished'.
The beauty of this article (in regard to distribution) is that by focusing on Bitcoin, it makes the far more wide-ranging discussion on freedom, consensual slavery, anonymity & complicity etc, an easier share and pill to swallow. In other words, I can distribute this 'message' among those within the financial realm and beyond who might consider the elements discussed - sovereignty of the individual, CBDCs as a control grid - to be the ramblings of a 'conspiracy theorist'. As it is, your message - delivered under the safety cloak of Bitcoin - gets across loud and clear that the most effective form of control is the illusion of choice and frictionless compliance doesn't require force - just the right incentives.
As nobody likes to be fooled - especially in the world of finance where there are so many layers of wanton obfuscation – they will happily consume this, hopefully igniting a spark (albeit unconsciously to begin with) which - as you say - cannot then be extinguished. So thank you, for this literary Trojan Horse. Clever.
I watched the whole BT development with amusement. First, how money you can't use to buy anything was useful?
Then, governments started regulating and outright banning it. How can you ban something that is all over internet? It shouldn't be possible unless you turn off the whole internet. Decentralized it wasn't.
Then, governments started demanding you declare your BTs in your annual money declaration (IRS in the US or IRPF here in Brazil). How did this happened? How is the government able to know if I have BTs in the first place?
Erik is showing us in a magnificent way that TDS+EDS somehow equals BDS. I love the title "When Freedom becomes control" becuase Erick would rather have USD and the Fed because that has zero control. Or is he advocating Gold exchanges at your nearest Walmart? because that just screams "financial system of the future!"
If you believe the binary choice is between central banking and Bitcoin, you're missing the point. True financial sovereignty requires questioning all systems, especially those selling salvation narratives..
Then there's the internet hubs problem. It only takes the take down of the 10 main hubs and internet is basically reduced to a big LAN. No internet, no btc.
Thanks for bringing up important questions. I will attempt to answer one:
"Why would the very institutions Bitcoin was meant to disrupt so eagerly adopt it?"
The answer lies in the understanding that today's Bitcoin (BTC) is very different from the invention created by Satoshi Nakamoto. See more on for example:
Hi Erik, I agree with you that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general have been the test case for upcoming programmable CBDCs, which will result in the greatest loss of freedom in human history. However, the specific mechanism that the NSA/CIA use to control the crypto space is via the flimsy Tether scam, which has more trading volume than the top ten coins *combined*. Tether is meant to be 1:1 with USD, but the evidence shows that Tether is a giant ponzi scheme and the vast majority of Tether are simply printed out of thin air and shoved into the crypto space, massively inflating it. Our elites can crash the entire crypto market in a single second by taking out Tether, and/or cutting off the fiat on/offramps like via CIA/NSA controlled scam Coinbase. See here for more: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/misconceptions-regarding-viewing
And here on the upcoming digital panopticon: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/on-the-digital-panopticon-mark-of
Spot on :) Tether is the easiest kill switch for the entire crypto market. Its unbacked USDT has been the primary tool for artificially inflating Bitcoin’s price, and the fact that regulators haven’t touched it tells us it’s still serving its purpose. When it’s no longer useful, pulling the plug on Tether (or cutting off on/off ramps like Coinbase) would collapse the entire space overnight - pushing people toward the ‘solution’ they always intended: CBDCs and full-spectrum financial control. When doing these longer peices I tend to always forget some crucial aspect which the perfectionist in me hates. But there's a lot more to know to complete the picture. Thanks for the links, will dig in!
FedNOW is the CBDC payment rail but there’s little indication they want to run it themselves.
The game has shifted from .gov-administered CBDC to “public-private partnership,” at least in the US.
The stablecoins themselves will build a backbone of alleged “free market” options. Howard Lutnick gets Tether, Peter Thiel gets PYUSD, Larry Summers at Circle/Coinbase get USDC. Plans could always change but I don't think they want to pull the plug on these operations - they want them to be the public-facing CBDC without having to call it CBDC.
Even the flimsy public balance sheets of USDT, COIN, and other entities wrapped up in this are piling into long-dated Treasurys, indicating further that they intend to use existing stablecoin infrastructure to backstop existing US debt and roll the new financial system.
Everything is in place now so the carrots and sticks will come fast. DOGE floating the idea of $5k stimulus checks is a likely beta test.
Our elites want, wherever possible, the public to consent to it's own enslavement. Whether it's due to an occult reason - if the public doesn't object then it's like they asset to it, which makes the elite not responsible for the evils they inflict in their minds - or if it's due to practical realities, i.e. it much easier and cheaper to use soft power versus hard power, or a combination, I agree with you that things are currently shaping up for this gross and disgusting public-private partnership based in retarded stablecoins. I would really not be surprised for some nominal payment like $5,000 to be used to get the public to voluntarily assent to this horrific nonsense.
Consent is essential. It always has been and is more than abundantly evident.
Free will must be exercised for the transaction to be completed.
This speaks to the wisdom of God.
A time is approaching and all signs say rapidly approaching, when people will choose between this world and the next.
Between the life of the material and the life of the Spirit.
I think all these complicated shenanigans are to confuse those without a solid foundation. Though a warning was issued that even those with discernment will find these tricky times to navigate if the mind is allowed to rule.
It's simple if you follow the Spirit. Though not necessarily easy.
I think this is why they always choose manioulation over straight force - because of the inherent free will aspect of creation. We have to choose our own enslavement, it cannot be forced upon us unless we accept our chains. I agree, it feels like we are rapidly approaching some sort of turning point, what lies beyond it - who knows - but it’s going to be a hell of a ride.
Yes indeed - ask Howard Lutznick who's refused to be audited apparently 👍
I once invested in Bitcoin, not much. Then I started thinking about it and researching it, and figured out the alleged freedom was still controlled by onramps and offramps. I could hold it as long as I wanted but in order to cash in I still had to use the financial institutions I was led to believe I had freedom from. Bitcoiners are a cult, and Bitcoin is their god.
Pump and Dump. All by design.
The irony here is that in the short term (next several years), everything you describe will only drive the price up. Obviously this is playing with fire but is it possible to be invested in BTC but not support it long term?
Yes definately, now this is where there is no easy answer. Same with the AI question. Can we in the interim use it to our benefit to grow the resistance against the thing were trying to fight - or is that a part of the trap? It's the allure of "easy money" and "higher productivity" and it will sound so alluring.
But as, I beleive it was Tucker Max who once said; "The devil doesn't come dressed in red and pointy horns, he comes dressed as everything you ever wished for.
I’ll admit I was caught by the hype back in 2016 and believed strongly in the decentralized cryptocurrency future of banking. It also helped that I was living outside the US at the time, in a country with very minimal cryptocurrency regulation. I loved the feeling of anonymity and freedom it gave me. It really did make me open my eyes and rethink the nature of global finance, and that was and is a good thing, as it also lead to a deeper understanding of the corrupt financial / banking system and the highly manipulated markets. From 2016 to 2022 I saw the freedom and anonymity slowly and steadily being sucked out of the crypto space and the slow creep of centralization and elite money master co-opting. Now that sufficient AI has “arrived” they have the perfect brain to manage the financial panopticon.
Another thing that’s been on my mind is how they have continually replaced real life and physical interactions and objects with ephemeral digital substitutes -social media, online culture, virtual worlds, screen addiction, community breakdown etc…this is just the further breakdown of money into something even more intangible, worthless and fake. They work tirelessly to gobble up all hard physical assets while diverting and denying them all to us.
Sorry for the long retort but this is sort of our wheel house, as early adopters and proponents of decentralization and transparency in all systems.
First we want to clarify that Bitcoin never promised this: "The Nakamoto paradox is this: a system designed to free us from financial surveillance." The white papers only stated that the core goal of Bitcoin was to provide a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" that would allow people to transact directly with each other without needing a trusted third party, like a bank. It was made to free us from centralized bank control. Permissionless money. And it delivered here.
Today, if you tried to send a lot of money to Japan or Australia you would need permission. Try getting on a plane with $100k in cash or gold. A wire transfer or check or credit card requires permission. Bitcoin does not.
As for some of the other concerns in the article, there are reasonable concerns. But not without some clarity.
While Bitcoin has evolved, it still offers a decentralized structure compared to traditional financial systems controlled by central banks. It remains resistant to government manipulation, even if certain aspects are more centralized than originally envisioned.
Bitcoin’s transparency is a double-edged sword. While it's true that transactions are visible on the blockchain, this transparency is often mischaracterized as an effective surveillance tool. In reality, pseudonymity and privacy tools (like CoinJoin and Lightning Network) allow users to obscure their identities. Also, use COLD wallets to store your stash.
Satoshi’s ability to craft a technically perfect system does not imply external interference. The skills needed to create Bitcoin were not as rare as you might think, especially given that open-source cryptography and cryptographic models were already available. Also, while the NSA did develop the SHA-256 algorithm, it is widely used in cryptographic systems and is not a unique fingerprint for surveillance. The use of established cryptographic methods in Bitcoin doesn't imply an intentional surveillance agenda. Unless you have more info that would be new news. The involvement of prominent figures and groups like the PayPal Mafia with Bitcoin is often overstated. These actors were early adopters but did not dictate Bitcoin’s design or goals. Bitcoin’s open-source nature allows anyone to participate, and its development was led by a diverse global community.
While mining pools dominate a significant portion of the hash rate, Bitcoin is still more decentralized than traditional financial systems. Efforts to increase decentralization, such as the development of alternative mining mechanisms and layer 2 solutions, continue to evolve. Bitcoin’s development is not as centralized as suggested. While key developers do influence the codebase, Bitcoin's open-source nature means anyone can propose changes. The BIP process is transparent and community-driven, and large-scale changes are typically the result of broad consensus. The role of exchanges and custodians is an unfortunate reality of mainstream adoption, but they are not an inherent flaw in Bitcoin itself. Bitcoin can still be used outside centralized exchanges with the proper tools (e.g., self-custody and decentralized exchanges).
The argument that Bitcoin leads to total surveillance ignores the growing privacy-focused developments within the ecosystem, such as privacy coins, CoinJoin, and zk-SNARKs. Bitcoin transactions can be analyzed, but true financial surveillance requires not just data access but also identification, which is much harder to achieve.
Palantir is highly concerning. Agree there. But what is their play besides trying to track and analyze data?
Bitcoin's reframing as "digital gold" is not necessarily an act of co-option; it may be a strategic evolution in response to market demands and investor interest. The counter point is the Corrupters (the elites) realized Bitcoin was going forward with or without them, so they joined the party as to not look foolish. Do they want control? Of course Blackrock and Vanguard want control. But Bitcoin is the largest network in the history of MANKIND. It's not so easy.
Is Bitcoin bullet proof? Maybe not. But as you concluded it makes humanity talk about the right things. Decentralization. Transparency. And better systems without authority controlling us as gatekeepers.
Also, another paradox. If we can see all transactions, then why don't we put all government spending on the transparent ledger? If it is a trap for us it can be a trap for them as well.
Transparency, after all, is the solution for corruption.
We "interviewed" Satoshi a few years back. https://joshketry.substack.com/p/satoshi-lives-an-exclusive-interview?utm_source=publication-search
Maxi cope, easily debunked.
Very sad, many such cases!
What is easily debunked? Can you please use full coherent sentences if you care to disagree? This kind of emotional name calling to end a discussion is a tactic of the far left, even though the right has now adopted "black pilled" as one of their own. "Maxi cope" is about on par with "conspiracy theorist" "trust the science" or "fake news" (all of which get slung our way daily).
Isn't this a page for thinkers and those not afraid of a culture of criticism?
We agree with the wariness of the author. And he may be right about some things. But he left out some important things we wanted to highlight.
The only thing we are "maxi" about is better systems that are harder to corrupt.
>What is easily debunked?
Your entire novella.
>Can you please use full coherent sentences if you care to disagree?
Just read Hijacking Bitcoin. Or don't. You're a True Believer so nothing will sway you either way.
Who hasn't read that? There is nothing new there. That was like 2017
It might be new to you, though, because you clearly weren't around back then and haven't questioned any of the underlying presuppositions the book presents.
You're still holding water for L2 vaporware that will never solve the NP Hard^2 Traveling Salesman's Dilemma (even Lightning's creator admits this and left the project as a result), clear-cut intelligence agency and NGO involvement in SegWit (some of whom, like Peter Todd, were Core developers), the absolutely laughable state of BIP pull requests for even minor architectural changes, and a bevy of other fantasies.
I was very fortunate to have a front-row seat working at a crypto company whose name you would know and is now a large publicly traded entity when all this was going on. Non-zero odds that your UTXOs have touched my code at some point. Be thankful that Roger Ver and others put pen to paper for those of you who weren't paying attention back then, he's in jail now because of it.
You should actually read the book sometime. You're robbing yourself of a tremendous amount of context by continuing to peddle a dead duck cypherpunk narrative that anyone with technical ability or geopolitical understanding abandoned long ago.
Or don't. Again, you're a True Believer. Nothing anyone says will change your mind.
Dismissing the entire argument as "vaporware" without addressing the core principles only weakens your position. Bitcoin, at its core, offers a system that is decentralized, transparent, and resistant to censorship. No matter how flawed certain aspects or participants may be, that’s still a significant improvement over centralized institutions. The fact that people are still pushing forward improvements—whether you agree with them or not—proves that the ecosystem is constantly evolving. And as for the claims of corruption or geopolitical involvement, no system is perfect, but that doesn’t invalidate the foundational value of the technology. The question is not whether Bitcoin is flawless, but whether it offers a more resilient alternative to the broken systems we currently rely on. Disregarding the progress and potential of the broader crypto ecosystem is a disservice to real innovation. And there is nothing to believe except results.
Show clearly how it is corrupted by corrupting it.
Very insightful article! A star is rising above the horizon!
In my book The Predators versus The People (https://thepredatorsversusthepeople.substack.com/s/book-overview)
I describe how the project for world domination has been advancing, slowly but steadily, for 500 years. Its present leaders have a vast experience in developing financial and other systems. I show that they are totally ruthless and extremely cunning, and that they were the organizers of the world wars and communist revolutions, with 200 million victims in the 20th century alone.
From the lessons learned it was impossible to assume that a new, ambitious and independent financial system like bitcoin would escape their control. Now you confirmed it! Thanks for your great contribution to "knowing your enemy"!
By the way, I share the critique on your suggestion in a previous paper that the tech billionaires are behind this: they are just the errand boys of the great dynastic families pulling the strings from behind the scenes.
> “The most sophisticated operations don't appear as control - they appear as liberation.”
Whoa. This line needs a warning label: [GROKKING THIS MAY LEAD TO COUNTLESS REALIZATIONS & SLEEPLESS NIGHTS]
'Bitcoin may not be the flawless solution many hoped for, but it has ignited a global conversation about sovereignty, freedom, and decentralization - and that spark cannot be extinguished'.
The beauty of this article (in regard to distribution) is that by focusing on Bitcoin, it makes the far more wide-ranging discussion on freedom, consensual slavery, anonymity & complicity etc, an easier share and pill to swallow. In other words, I can distribute this 'message' among those within the financial realm and beyond who might consider the elements discussed - sovereignty of the individual, CBDCs as a control grid - to be the ramblings of a 'conspiracy theorist'. As it is, your message - delivered under the safety cloak of Bitcoin - gets across loud and clear that the most effective form of control is the illusion of choice and frictionless compliance doesn't require force - just the right incentives.
As nobody likes to be fooled - especially in the world of finance where there are so many layers of wanton obfuscation – they will happily consume this, hopefully igniting a spark (albeit unconsciously to begin with) which - as you say - cannot then be extinguished. So thank you, for this literary Trojan Horse. Clever.
I watched the whole BT development with amusement. First, how money you can't use to buy anything was useful?
Then, governments started regulating and outright banning it. How can you ban something that is all over internet? It shouldn't be possible unless you turn off the whole internet. Decentralized it wasn't.
Then, governments started demanding you declare your BTs in your annual money declaration (IRS in the US or IRPF here in Brazil). How did this happened? How is the government able to know if I have BTs in the first place?
Here in Brazil you pay taxes on "your" BTs.🤣
So much for freedom. 🤣
Can we really live free of the government?
Erik is showing us in a magnificent way that TDS+EDS somehow equals BDS. I love the title "When Freedom becomes control" becuase Erick would rather have USD and the Fed because that has zero control. Or is he advocating Gold exchanges at your nearest Walmart? because that just screams "financial system of the future!"
If you believe the binary choice is between central banking and Bitcoin, you're missing the point. True financial sovereignty requires questioning all systems, especially those selling salvation narratives..
You mean like how you question USD?
Yes
That sums it up huh, “when freedom becomes control”
Then there's the internet hubs problem. It only takes the take down of the 10 main hubs and internet is basically reduced to a big LAN. No internet, no btc.
Thanks for bringing up important questions. I will attempt to answer one:
"Why would the very institutions Bitcoin was meant to disrupt so eagerly adopt it?"
The answer lies in the understanding that today's Bitcoin (BTC) is very different from the invention created by Satoshi Nakamoto. See more on for example:
https://bitcoinsteffen.com/how-mastercard-and-bilderberg-group-have-sabotaged-bitcoin-btc/
Brilliant as always 👍…..unfortunately, I share your point of view again.