10 sats \ 1 reply \ @felix 30 Oct 2022 \ on: Satoshi responds to Greenpeace Climate Criticism (12 years ago!) bitcoin
One thing I don't fully understand yet is the opinion that with Bitcoin, we'll not need police, a legal system, national defense, or a state overall.
I kind of feel like there's a lot of truth to that, but I can't explain it myself yet. Can someone point me in the right direction?
I think we have to ask ourselves what fundamentally those institutions do, and why human civilization has them in the first place.
"It's to keep ourselves safe" —
Great. But why are we in danger?
"Well, disputes happen. Contract disagreements. Thievery. Tempers rise" —
Okay. But WHY does that happen? What do contracts disagree about? What do thieves steal? What makes people so angry they resort to violence? Why do nations invade other countries and what's the incentive for doing so?
"It's all about resources" — if Bitcoin is the ultimate form of property, then the inability to confiscate it without the owner's consent fundamentally realigns the incentives that lead to, say, thievery, or conquest. You can't "conquer" a people and confiscate all their Bitcoin the way you used to be able to steal their livestock or oil.
That's the idea behind it, anyway.
Me personally, I don't know where I stand on it. I don't think anyone really does. It seems to me the incentive to hit someone with a bat and steal their property is diminishing, but the incentive to manipulate them into surrendering their property willingly is increasing.
reply