Af monstre og maksimalisme — Bitcoin-kultur er skabt af værditilpasning

Dette er en meningsredaktion af John Vallis, host of the Bitcoin Rapid-Fire podcast, passionate bitcoin advocate and enthusiastic explorer of the profound implications it represents.

TL;DR: Forbliv ydmyg, stak sats.

There’s been a lot of really ignorant takes on “bitcoin maximalism” and “purity tests” lately, and as I sit here with a fresh coconut water, blissed-out from nearly being choked unconscious this morning (a common hazard of rolling with blackbelts), a gentle wind upon my face, and the serene sounds of birds chirping … I’m struck with a question, one that puts my entire worldview in jeopardy, and which risks disrupting the peaceful Zen of an otherwise magnificent morning: Am I the baddy?

Kan det være, at jeg er en del af en eller anden giftig online-kult, der består af intolerante, for det meste hvide (og formentlig meget suveræne) fyre, der går i gang med at tæske til underkastelse alle, der modsætter sig deres syn på økonomi, politik, ernæring, parforhold og meget mere udover?

My god, what have I become? How did I get here? And how can I rid myself of this insufferable and deplorable intolerance and get back to being … being what? Being … I guess … someone who adopts the dominant cultural worldview? Or who blindly accepts authority? Or who says nothing outside the bounds of political correctness? Or who ignores the fundamental importance of character? Or who lacks the courage and internal consistency to stand up against the status quo? Or who’d rather be more critical of a budding culture centered around certain fundamental principles and values, than the one run by criminals and incompetents which makes egregious violations of rights, decency and property a matter of course, and who fails to realize that bitcoin is likely the only thing that has a shot at fixing that? Or who wants to stay within a nice, familiar, comfortable conception of themselves and just ignore the individual changes that may be required to tilt things toward a more beneficial future for all?

Ja, ja, for Guds kærlighed, få mig tilbage til det umiddelbart før jeg bliver tvunget til at deltage i endnu en kedelig bøfmiddag!

Ok, det ser ud til, at jeg har fået en lidt sjusket start her.

Tøm det, John. Tag dig god tid, vær betænksom og klar med dit sprog. Ingen kan lide rodet skrivning.

Nå, det kan være rigtigt, men sidste gang jeg prøvede at skrive noget "rigtigt" om hele den "maksimalistiske toksicitet/kultur", var januar 2021, og et år senere resulterede det på en eller anden måde i en Afhandling på 40,000 ord on how bitcoin may very well represent the notion of “the second coming of Christ,” — and I’d prefer to avoid such a detour this time, if possible.

Ah fanden. Jeg mistede lige 95% af jer med hele den Jesus-bit, ikke? Nå, nu er der ingen vej tilbage. Jeg sørgede for at tisse, før jeg startede dette, og bevidsthedsstrømmen har forladt stationen baby! (Jeg håber, du hørte det med George Costanza-stemme, for det var sådan det spillede i mit hoved.) Så vi bliver bare nødt til at arbejde med det, vi har. Forbered dig på, at dine grammatiske følsomheder bliver krænket.

On the upside, this foible has probably transported me back into the warm, fuzzy and intoxicating confines of the bitcoin maxi echo chamber. Ahhhh, permit me a moment to bask in its glory and breathe a sigh of relief.

Nu hvor vi har frafiltreret de ikke-troende, ikke-spillende karakterer, professionelle lovovertrædelser, kartesianere … nej vent, det er taget … Kartonianere … nej, fuck, hvordan tages det?!

Hmmm, Carterians [Kar-tare-ee-en]? Ja, Carterians, det kan jeg godt lide. Det er der allerede på internettet, nogle jazz sang, but that’s not sufficient to deter me from a better use of it here. And finally, people who find themselves working at the Bitcoin Policy Institute (I kid, I kid, there’s some good people there) we can get down to brass tacks, which makes me think of brass balls, which makes me think of the lack of balls on the robot bull at the Bitcoin Conference this year, and how dumb that was. Male bulls fuck stuff. We’re trying to fuck the fiat system here. Get over it. (Plus, how is that bull supposed to sun his balls if he doesn’t even have any? Ever think of that BRAINIACS?!)

Anyhoo, hvor var jeg?

I suppose my motivation for tackling this issue, aside from a perhaps self-serving desire to depart, briefly, from the (actually) tedious, and presumably far less “violent” task of writing a book about value, is the absolutely confounding contrast between what I hear about this (insert pejorative-laden characterization of bitcoin maximalists), and my own experience of “them.”

Eksempelvis bragte jeg min far i april til den berømte eller berygtede (afhængigt af dit perspektiv) oksekød i Miami.

Inden jeg gik ind, advarede jeg ham naturligvis, hvilke ord han skulle bruge og ikke bruge, aldrig at afslå et tilbud om oksekød (selvom det var fyldt til opkastning), for at sikre, at han ikke blev set spise noget, der kunne skabe mistanke om indeholdende enten sukker eller frøolier (Fuck you, Mandrik!), og for Guds kærlighed skal du under ingen omstændigheder nævne, at du lejlighedsvis giver mor en fodgnidning (Nogle gange kan jeg slet ikke tro, at du var i stand til at få mor gravid med så meget østrogen, der pumper gennem dine årer. Ingen ramme!).

Selvfølgelig laver jeg sjov - eller prøver i det mindste.

Hvad jeg faktisk fortalte ham var; "Vær dig selv, det er alt, du behøver at vide."

Og det, hvis du ikke allerede var klar over det, er pointen med alt dette - frihed.

Det, der fulgte, var en oplevelse, der for altid vil være en af ​​de mest værdsatte i mit liv.

For about the first two hours, we didn’t go further than 10 meters from the front door, not even into the main area of the venue.

Enhver, der har deltaget i en bøf, ved hvorfor.

Du ser en, du kender, eller nogen kommer hen til dig og siger "Hey, det er mig, @btcforevercryharder på Twitter" (ikke et egentligt håndtag, i hvert fald ikke i skrivende stund); hvad der følger er et blik af jublende overraskelse, et "hellig" efterfulgt af enten "fuck", "shit", "bolde" eller et andet udtryk, der betegner ekstrem lykke, en lang, langsom og stram sammenføring af hjerter og pikke ( også kendt som et kram), og derefter, i flere ubrudte timer, hvad der kun kan karakteriseres som ren og skær nydelse af hinandens selskab, ofte centreret omkring radikal autenticitet og diskussioner om så stødende emner som:

• “How has bitcoin caused you to take more responsibility in your life?”
• “What are the implications of such an absolute and verifiable form of truth emerging in the world?”
• “How did you get your permaculture ranch started?”
• “What are some of the most interesting books you’ve read lately?”
• “What advice do you have for raising strong, competent, independent, understanding children?”
• “I’m trying to write, contribute, build a product/service/business, do you have any advice?”

Followed by “Eric Cason is scaring me, am I destined for this fate if I continue down the rabbit hole?” And perhaps more concerning than all of these, several extremely sincere expressions of gratitude/praise/respect, followed by the sharing of quite intimate (and often challenging) life events, who’s resolution was precipitated, or at least greatly aided, by not only pursuing an understanding of bitcoin, and learning how it might best resolve some of the worlds biggest problems, but also, and often more powerfully, finding a group of people, dare I say, a distributed emerging culture, who share that perspective, and who are likewise being beneficially transformed in the process of pursuing a similar goal, and with whom some of the most genuine and positive relationships of their life have quickly been established.

For at få mere kød på denne knogle til dig, går sidstnævnte møder ofte sådan her:

“Before bitcoin I was depressed, despondent, nihilistic, had very little meaning in my life and that led to treating myself and others poorly, holding myself to a very low standard, and basically just drifting through life. I couldn’t see how the many giant problems of the world could be resolved, and felt things were fucked up beyond repair, so I guess I just let myself off the hook for whatever responsibility I hold for trying to fix it, or myself. It was a dark and isolating feeling, which I compensated for in several “destructive” or unhealthy ways. I even considered killing myself (this one was not as common, but not uncommon either). But since I started learning about bitcoin, everything has begun to change. I now see light at the end of the tunnel. I now have HOPE! And this has awakened in me a renewed, even unprecedented sense of enthusiasm and energy, and a recognition of, and responsibility for, the central role that my own development, my own actions, my own character, play in turning this thing around. I see bitcoin as a tool for aiding me in that endeavor, and fixing, at a fundamental level, the system that generates so many of the problems that I was lamenting, or subconsciously being affected by (and likely contributing to). You, along with many others here, have helped me to see and appreciate that, and instilled in me the knowledge/wisdom/courage/optimism required to turn myself into someone that can be part of the solution, and I just wanted to come, shake your hand, and say thank you.”

Åh rædselen!! Den uforstyrrede toksicitet!! Få mig ud herfra!!

Der er dem, der måske siger: "Men hvad nu hvis der dukker et emne op, som jeg faktisk ser ud til at have temmelig divergerende holdninger til fra "ortodoksien?" Presset for at indordne sig er knusende! Hvor er det sikre rum i denne gudsforladte hule af hugorme!?”

Nå, for det første, sådan noget, "ortodoksen", eksisterer ikke, i det mindste ingen andre steder end dit eget sind. Du fandt på det. Fuldt stop.

"Hvorfor gjorde jeg det!?" spørger du måske.

Nå, jeg er ingen Sigmund Freud her, men det kan være tilfældet, at du har opfundet en boogeyman, der skal tjene som en bekvem syndebuk for at undgå at konfrontere noget i dig selv. Måske gør du dette for at ignorere eller formindske et perspektiv, der udfordrer et, du har i øjeblikket, hvilket hjælper med at lindre enhver indre spænding eller ubehag, det kan forårsage, og måske endda retfærdiggøre en vis kritik, som du kan, som et resultat af det spænding, føler sig tvunget til at opkræve.

Your interpretation (read: projection) of “bitcoin culture” is about YOU. That is to say, it’s subjective. And this is the case for all of us.

Nu er det ikke til at sige, at mange mennesker ikke opfatter det på en meget lignende måde, som det ser ud til, at de gør.

Men der er ingen tjekliste, intet hemmeligt håndtryk (eller er der?), og ingen test at tage. Tværtimod er der en (for det meste uudtalt) anerkendelse blandt hinanden af ​​et lignende sæt værdier - et tilsvarende struktureret internt værdihierarki, om man vil - og en gensidig interesse indbyrdes om, hvordan hver person handler dem.

Dette er ikke synderligt unikt. Som mennesker, generelt set, sætter vi konstant op på hinanden og spørger: "Hvad forfølger de?" eller måske, "Hvad er deres højeste stræben?" efterfulgt af "Hvorfor er det det?" og "Hvordan har de det?" Dette hjælper os med at bestemme, hvordan vi gerne vil interagere med andre, og hvordan vi kan ændre vores egne handlinger, alt efter hvordan deres eksempel hjælper os med at besvare disse spørgsmål i forhold til os selv.

På denne måde dømmer og bliver vi alle altid dømt. Dette er ikke en dårlig ting - faktisk er det en uundgåelig del af opfattelsen, da vi søger at bevæge os mest effektivt mod de ting, resultater og mennesker, som vi anser for at være mest værdifulde eller værd.

Nogle vælger at eksplicitere deres skøn, andre gør ikke (den kategori jeg oftest falder ind under).

As a result, if you’re truly trying to identify the source of your discomfort with “these people,” and resolve it, then the more pertinent question arises — one regarding your own orientation, precisely why it is “divergent,” and whether or not it’s “justifiably” so.

Dette forsøg på at bestemme korrekt eller optimal orientering er i øvrigt årsagen til den heftige debat, der ofte finder sted, og noget enhver ægte "sandhedssøger" ville være taknemmelig for.

Skal du ikke have dine ideer på prøve? Endnu vigtigere, men mere ubehageligt, bør du ikke ønske at få dine mest fundamentale overbevisninger, aksiomer eller principper, de primære determinanter for din karakter, hvem du er, konstant undersøgt af dig eller andre, for at sikre, at de fortsætter med at være de mest gavnlige, du er i stand til at undfange og adoptere? Hvis du konstant forsøger at forbedre dig selv, bør du så ikke være taknemmelig for en sådan granskning, på trods af det ubehag, det kan forårsage?

Det betyder selvfølgelig ikke, at kilden til denne dom er rigtig, eller at du automatisk skal ændre din adfærd for at passe til den. Det kan faktisk være totalt affald. Men hvordan ved du det, hvis du ikke ser ærligt på det?

If one’s primary goal is moral refinement (and I increasingly struggle to come up with an argument for anything being more important or worthwhile than that) should we not always remain open to things that might foster it? Furthermore, should we not expect that, in order for us to see something that we had been missing before, we may have to be jarred out of our current narrow perspective, in order to be made aware of it? And that this may mean it comes in a form that is, at first, off-putting to us?

Det er alt at sige, bør vi ikke forblive ydmyge i vores stræben mod idealet?

For at omskrive hvad siger Jordan Peterson ofte, "Den skat, du søger, er ofte der, hvor du mindst har lyst til at se."

Uanset om du er enig i ovenstående eller ej, og med risiko for at blive alt for formastelig, vil jeg give nogle råd:

Bliv ikke fornærmet. Bare lad være. Der er ingen gyldig grund til det. De er bare ord, enten irrelevante eller nyttige, og det er helt dit privilegium at bestemme hvilke.

Det forekommer mig, at en sådan holdning deles ganske bredt blandt de "gennemsnitlige maksimalister", og den synes at fremme utroligt stærke, ægte, ansvarlige og ja, sjove venskaber med hinanden.

If, alternatively to such an approach, it appears as though someone is operating with a different attitude, and is engaging with an ulterior (or superior, in the hierarchical sense) set of values, principles or motives, such as the preservation of their vaunted status, intellect, identity, financial interests or otherwise, then they may, at least in the context of Bitcoin Twitter, be subject to the prodding and poking of the much-maligned bitcoin “cyber hornets.”

Løb for livet!!

Jeg griner altid, når jeg hører skrigene fra det seneste "Åh min gud, de er så forfærdelige", mens jeg ser på de involverede avatarer og indser, at jeg kender mange af dem personligt, og at de faktisk er nogle af de mest højintegrerede, oprejste mennesker, jeg kender, i bund og grund bare helt med på den samme kosmiske joke.

Hvis du fjerner al støjen, er det, der virkelig sker her, afsløringen af ​​karakter. En modvilje mod det, eller i det mindste en følelsesladet reaktion, er højst sandsynligt et bevis på, at den opnåede dom i det mindste i en eller anden forstand var gyldig.

Sure, nobody has the “right” to judge you, as all of us are imperfect. But, in my experience, I have found that to be a suboptimal perspective to take on what could otherwise be helpful data in furthering the enterprise of your own self-understanding and development. Put another way, it seems to me that a more useful approach, if we wish to learn as much as possible, is to seek to tease the good out of the bad, not the other way around.

It may be wise to remember, at least in this regard, that “ego is the enemy.”

Så hvis du oplever, at du ofte får sand i dine bukser, er det måske værd at overveje, at mindre ego sandsynligvis ikke kun vil reducere tilbøjeligheden til, at cybersværme "stikker" dig, og ikke kun føre til større adgang til sandheden (generelt set), men vil nok bare gøre alt dette meget sjovere.

Ingen er faktisk vrede her (medmindre du er det). Det hele er bare et spil, i sidste ende til din egen fordel.

Nu om monetær maksimalisme.

I’m not even going to explain this one here. There are lots of great resources out there which make the case for why bitcoin vil stå som vinder i den globale konkurrence om penge, og hvorfor det ville være en meget god ting at være sket (mildt sagt!).

That said, bitcoin becoming the next dominant global money is but one aspect of this “cultural phenomenon.” The qualities or principles which seem to be represented in bitcoin, the circumstances of the environment in which it’s emerging and the manner in which it seems to be beneficially altering perception, is having a number of fascinating and, as far as I can tell, extremely positive effects on those who “see it,” which extend into areas far beyond just money and economics.

So, might Bitcoiners (yes, I’m projecting here) be wrong on some of the things they currently discuss, espouse or represent?

Selvfølgelig.

Nobody knows what Bitcoin really is yet, and certainly not all its implications, nor why it’s having the effect on people which it is, nor how that effect may change in the future. Which is all to say, this enterprise, and each one of us engaged in it, is/are a work in progress.

Er det så slemt, at en voksende gruppe af mennesker nægter at outsource deres fastlæggelse af sandheden til nogle (sandsynligvis korrupte og/eller inkompetente) institutioner, som er langt væk fra deres eget livs virkelighed? At de selv lærer og eksperimenterer? At de ønsker at stole på sig selv eller hinanden frem for staten?

Måske venter de ikke på et eller andet brusehul i en laboratoriefrakke (ser på dig Ancel Keys) for at fortælle dem, hvad der er bedst for dem, eller hvad der er rigtigt eller forkert. De er mere end villige og i stand til at engagere sig i processen med at finde ud af sådanne ting selv, eller i det mindste prøve den mulighed først. De har ikke sat sig ind i den store regering/virksomhed/medie-matrix for at fremstille deres verdensbillede, faktisk har de koblet sig selv fra det og er aktivt engageret i processen med at bestemme, hvordan livet ser ud, og hvad det kan se ud uden for det.

Yes, this means more work may be required to figure things out (culture promulgates for good reason), and this will involve lots of vigorous debate, and error. They obviously think that’s a fair trade, and I for one think it’s fucking incredible that they’ve — we’ve — now got something in bitcoin with which to better stand up to the Frankenstein of an increasingly tyrannical statist/fiat monoculture that dominates the world today. The process of doing so, it would seem, is turning them into a better, more courageous, more capable, more admirable version of themselves, exceeding what many had even thought possible.

The recognition of the central importance of individual development, of character, of taking responsibility for those things that are most meaningful, like one’s own physical, mental and financial sovereignty, is increasingly recognized as the only hope we have of building, one person at a time, a world that is more fair, more just, more prosperous, more peaceful, and more truthful than anything that has been experienced before.

Hvis dette er sandt (og det tror jeg i vid udstrækning er det), er en kompromisløs holdning til værktøjet, som letter meget af det, ikke berettiget?

"Men kan de ikke bare være pænere ved det?"

Nå, for at være retfærdig er de fleste faktisk (SKAM!).

Men endnu vigtigere, vil du have dem til at være det? Virkelig? Hvad er det, du foretrækker, at de ikke siger eller gør? Sige onde ting til dig? Hvad hvis der er en værdi i de slemme ting? Hvad hvis der på trods af deres levering faktisk er noget der, der kan være nyttigt for dig? Vil du hellere have, at de bare holder stille, så du kan blive i din velkendte lille boble? Eller vil du hellere, at de giver dig noget feedback, som du måske kan bruge? Og ikke "Oreo cookie"-feedback, men den rigtige slags, ude i det fri, afstumpet, ærlig, for alle at se? Er det ikke det, du ville ønske, hvis du virkelig forfulgte din egen udvikling med den største oprigtighed?

Det var retoriske spørgsmål. Dine svar, faktisk alle vores, er allerede tydelige i, hvordan vi vælger at engagere os og reagere på sådanne ting.

Bitcoiners (at least this one) want to be shown where they are going astray, or at least have it put to them so they can consider it, and then recalibrate themselves if they determine they should. They willingly engage in that process, and the humility, courage and levity they do it with is something to be praised, not scorned. But just to clarify, surely it’s impossible to escape noticing that Bitcoiners fight amongst themselves just as much as they do with whatever person or group is currently playing their supposed victim, right?

Dette ser ud til at være omkostningerne ved at have sandheden, snarere end nemme svar, som topprioritet.

But while we’re here, for the sake of clarity, let’s make a distinction between nice and kind. Nice, in my opinion, is some intentionally-softened language to avoid upsetting someone’s fragile sensibilities, and is most appropriately used with children and strangers. Kind, on the other hand, is speaking to someone in a manner that you believe leaves them better off, or is most truthful, or serves the highest possible outcome of your interaction, as unconventional, unfamiliar, unappreciated or triggering to the receiver of said speech such an approach may be.

This is no easy task, and it does appear to me that many who might even agree with this approach, including Bitcoiners, often fail and fall victim to their own emotions, presumptions, egos, etc. But is this still not preferable? At least it’s an attempt at speaking the truth. And if it’s not even that, at least it’s someone who feels sufficiently unencumbered by the strictures of the current culturally-sanctioned language parameters to say whatever is on their mind, no matter how crazy or ugly it may sound. I’d say even that is more preferable to a false, restrained and ultimately unhelpful politeness.

… Ok, det var en længere omvej end forventet.

Hvad talte jeg om?

Oh yeah, the beefsteak. Anyways, the point of the story is that after an awesome evening, and having several Bitcoiners come up to me and say “Hey, your dad is super cool. Like, way cooler than you …” (he WAS wearing his beefsteak ball cap backwards, which, I must admit, looked très cool), my dad and I sat up for a nightcap at the place we were staying.

Ham: "Mand, det var så fantastisk. Jeg kan simpelthen ikke tro, hvor ydmyg, høflig, interessant, interesseret, håbefuld, intelligent, ægte, motiveret, principfast og sjovt at være sammen med alle. Som om jeg ikke stødte på nogen, der ikke var sådan.”

Me: “Yup. That’s Bitcoiners.”

Him: “You have to appreciate that I’m not used to experiencing such a high concentration of all those things in one place. My world is filled with complaints, victims, arrogance, and all sorts of other shit. That was so refreshing!”

Mig: "Ja. Det er ret sejt, hva?”

Ham: "Mand, det er fantastisk."

So what is it that separates, differentiates, or otherwise causes my dad and I to have such a dramatically different experience than those who think bitcoin is being held back or otherwise deleteriously affected by the very same group of people?

Mens de fleste komplekse sociale fænomener har mange medvirkende årsager, forekommer det mig, at hovedparten af ​​dette faktisk er ret tydeligt.

(Forbered dig på mere projicerende og formodende …)

Det ser ud til, at flere og flere mennesker begynder at indse, eller værdsætte mere end før, vigtigheden og fordelen ved visse værdier, og er blevet engagerede i processen med at forstå dem bedre og bruge dem til at orientere deres adfærd (bevidst eller ej).

De to mest fremtrædende blandt dem, så vidt jeg kan se, synes at være sandhed og frihed.

In bitcoin, they have found an “object” that appears to be both one of the highest-fidelity representations of these values ever implemented, as well as the literal mechanism by which more of those two things can be accessed or brought into their life. The juxtaposition of such a thing, with the broader culture of today, has created a tremendous shared enthusiasm for actualizing its perceived potential.

The striving toward something so important, meaningful and consequential, and the shared humility which it seems to instill (or select for), at least in relation to the central object of attention (bitcoin), creates fertile soil for and brings down barriers to, connecting with others doing the same.

I et sådant miljø, og netop modsat mobben af ​​kritikere, kan de relativt uvæsentlige eller overfladiske forskelle mellem mennesker faktisk fejres som interessepunkter, eller som minimum ses som irrelevante og ignorerede, snarere end splittende. Rigtig "mangfoldighed", yay!

Det, der bringer os sammen, som det så ofte er tilfældet, er en fælles ærbødighed for bestemte værdier og en fælles dedikation til en (meget meningsfuld) sag.

We are participating in what is possibly one of the most profound revolutions in human history here, which among other things, seems to have individual moral development as a prominent component. Certain values or moral principles appear to me to be “built-in” to bitcoin, and so, if true, is it any surprise that its effect on people (often) includes a strong moral dimension? Or introduces a moral imperative? Or even fosters a moral transformation?

I can appreciate how absurd this might sound, and it certainly was a surprising observation to me, but what if there’s something to it? Is it not a noble thing to be striving for?

Perhaps the form this phenomenon is taking is unexpected, or is making you uncomfortable in some way, which is unfortunate, but then again, perhaps there’s something of value to be learned from that response.

There’s a growing group of people out there in the world who’ve decided that there are few things more important than leveraging the benefits of bitcoin, pursuing an understanding of it, contributing to it, and remaining open to how engaging in that process is fostering positive change in their life, and accelerating the emergence of whatever latent potential both they and it might possess.

As a part of this process, it seems to be the case that many are increasingly acting as though the content of one’s character is of paramount importance — above even the content of one’s Medium page.

I’m inclined to agree.

This is a guest post by John Vallis. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.