The Guardian has reported this morning that:
The co-founders of Silicon Valley's most prominent venture capital firm have announced their support for Donald Trump's bid for re-election, and plan to make substantial donations to back him further.
Ben Horowitz and Marc Andreessen, the heads of Andreessen Horowitz, commonly known as A16Z, revealed their plans in a sprawling 90-minute podcast, in which they argued that the future of “American innovation” required a Trump victory.
There is a reason for their support. They are massive supporters of crypto-currency. They have been funding candidates in other elections on the basis of their support for it. New VP nominee, J D Vance is a massive fan of crypto too. They are booming in supposed value because of his nomination.
So what is this about? Very clearly it is about breaking three things.
The first is the sovereignty of the state, which is dependent on its power to create legal tender.
Second is the power to tax, which is dependent on the ability to trace the use of that legal tender.
Third, it is to break the power of the state to regulate the economy by creating parallel currencies that it cannot control and so impose its will.
This, then, is about ending the state as we know it.
The trouble, they have nothing to put in its place. They might think they are creating a route to freedom. They are actually creating a route to serfdom where we are all enslaved by forces beyond our control.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“They might think they are creating a route to freedom.”
They *know* they are creating a route to freedom. But it’s freedom for a few to batten off the many.
Whenever you hear politicians say ‘people’, ask: Who counts as people?
Whenever you hear politicians say freedom, ask: Freedom to do what?
Whenever you hear politicians say they want to grow the economy, or reform planning laws, or the NHS, ask: For whose benefit?
Politicians get away with it becuase they use weasel words that have a very specific meaning for them, but not for us. As in “I did not have sexual intercourse with that woman”. As in “All men are created equal”.
Much to agree with
Very well put; next time I find myself in a conversation about the merits of crypto, I’ll have your observations at my fingertips.
One could also add, of course, that crypto is about breaking our species’ life-support system by making inordinate demands on the generation of power.
And many other evils.
Your second para is very important too
But they think they can but themselves out of that
All these folk that hate government are the first to dial 911/999 when they have been robbed…. and complain when the police don’t show up.
They seem to think a world without government would be a return to the Garden of Eden…. but the reality is chaos and civil war. If you doubt this look at history.
I noticed this particularly in the Johnson era, very clever use of words without inferring anything specific negatively or positively.
There’s a big push from the right to be anti-establishment yet as we know it’s all about control. Follow the money as they say
Whenever a politician or supporter tells you that something provides freedoms (freeports, free trade, freedom from regulations), ask your self: “free for whom”? Because it probably won’t be you.
Free means free: from accountability and responsibility, enabling the freedom to exploit and pollute the environment.
Digital currencies gives those who control it, the ability in charge fees (private taxes), and the ability to disable it if you don’t abide by certain rules and regulation (e.g. until you pay your TV licence), and the ability to trace you (e.g. the people who purchased alcohol).
Do I trust the government, or Big Business, to use digital currencies responsibly?
Certainly not based on their track record.
Thanks
You finish “They are actually creating a route to serfdom where we are all enslaved by forces beyond our control.”
I expect you are making a reference to Hayek’s book ‘The Road to Serfdom’ (which Mrs Thatcher told her civll servants to read). Some regard it as the Bible of neo-liberalism, and it said that tyranny results from government control of economic decision making.
It is ironic -and tragic-that his prescription taken to extremes, produces the same result.