11 ms·

I wonder why all the libertarian freedom loving crypto guys keep backing fascists

mothballed 3mo ago
It's not hard to figure out, the fascists have been more explicitly welcoming to crypto freedom or at least put themselves out there to solicit that vote even if you claim their underlying policies aren't. Trump offered the freedom of Ross Ulbricht at the libertarian convention, did Kamala come to the libertarian convention and offer anything?
- pjc50 3mo ago
  > Trump offered the freedom of Ross Ulbricht at the libertarian convention Libertarianism is when you can buy your way out of criminal convictions?
  - mothballed 3mo ago
    Trump wasn't running on Libertarianism (you can argue he pretended to at the convention, but no one actually buy that) , he was running on "Neither one of us is offering you libertarianism, but I will at least come here and offer you something."
- lostlogin 3mo ago
  > did Kamala come to the libertarian convention and offer anything? I thought that offering ‘not Trump’ would be enough. I was very wrong.
- ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
  If you back fascists to promote crypto, your values are fucked.
  - mothballed 3mo ago
    It's no wonder the fascists won the "libertarian" crypto vote when the message you and sister have for the comments as your campaign slogan to those voters is "your values are fucked" and "at least we're not the guy who showed up and offered you something." Did you think "your values are fucked" is actually persuasive at garnering votes?
    - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
      If libertarians can't parse than putting fascists in power is, long term, a bad fucking idea as demonstrated literally every time it's happened throughout history, I don't want their fucking vote. I'm not interested in their opinion about anything, especially this. It is not my nor anyone else's job, including Kamala's for that matter, to coddle your sweet little fee fees about wanting your fake power-wasting money to work. It is especially not anyone's job to tolerate socially corrosive viewpoints like fascism to indulge your ponzi scheme. Full stop. It's also well documented that fascists will happily enable and cosign the efforts of whatever their chosen right people are to steal money on industrial scales from everyone else, so they were always going to support crypto. Completely foregone conclusion and to be honest, I'd bet money that a notable amount of crypto figures did in fact know that and voted accordingly for the party that was prepared to let them get away with financial crimes, as they have done before, here and elsewhere. If you're so offended at the notion of someone saying your values are fucked, respectfully, un-fuck your values and then I won't have to say it anymore.
      - mothballed 3mo ago
        [flagged]
        ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
        > You've answered the question as to why those people didn't support you I asked no such question. You said: > It's not hard to figure out, the fascists have been more explicitly welcoming to crypto freedom or at least put themselves out there to solicit that vote even if you claim their underlying policies aren't. To which I said: > If you back fascists to promote crypto, your values are fucked. This is not a statement wondering why they didn't. I know why they didn't, even if I didn't directly say it. I'm saying here if your support for proper policies or candidates is contingent on their supporting your stupid shitcoins, then your values are fucked and I'm not interested in your conclusions as a result. Or to be more specific, if you're prepared to give Fascists power because you think it'll be better for your coinbase account, your values are fucked. And while there is certainly a cost to having principles, to say that Kamala didn't win because she refused to court crypto is just ridiculously out-of-touch. That's a big question with a lot of variables, but I assure you things like: 1) Her being a woman 2) Her being non-white 3) Her being yet another pro-corpo do-nothing Democrat, with a back story including being a PROSECUTOR of all things Had a shitload, a metric assload, an utter container-ship load more to do with her defeat than anything even tangentially related to your weird secondary finance system, and on that point I would bet a lot of REAL, not crypto, currency. And here's the part you're missing about Trump and his ilk "showing up": that offer means nothing. Fascist regimes don't keep promises to their useful idiots, they keep them right up until they're not useful anymore. They'll feed your crypto conartists to the same wolves they'll feed me to, because nobody wins long-term under fascism, including the fascists who aren't currently holding the leash. Ross Ulbricht's pardon doesn't tell you Trump loves crypto freedom, it tells you Trump knows how to make a low-cost gesture to a bloc he needs this cycle. And frankly it tracks well that crypto holders were targeted by the Trump admin anyway, you're a self-selecting bloc of marks, ready and eager to hold ANOTHER bag to go with the one you've statistically speaking, already got. But far more importantly: Fascists are not shy about the Fascist shit they aim to do, namely to harm people at scale. If you cosign that for bitcoin, I'm not here to persuade you or win your heart: that is not a position that a reasonable person takes, and so I see no purpose in attempting to reason with you.
ratelimitsteve 3mo ago
if you're in with the fascists they are the most liberty-oriented party. you can do whatever you want, entirely without regard to the law.
- mrguyorama 3mo ago
  But this has never been true. Lots of valuable, productive, and loyal Nazis ended up in political prisoner camps. Because that kind of kleptocracy runs on constantly fighting factions and incentives and selfishness. The core belief is selling someone else down the river because you can.
  - ratelimitsteve 2mo ago
    there's a difference between being a good and loyal fascist and being in with the fascists. you've actually hit on it. those valuable, productive and loyal nazis were allowed to do whatever they wanted without regard to the law when that benefited the party, then that same behavior that was legal and encouraged was what got them kidnapped and murdered by the party as soon as the winds shifted. The core belief of fascism is two-fold: selling someone down the river because you can and believing that either through compliance or raw power you'll never be the one sold down the river.
    - cindyllm 2mo ago
      [dead]
  - victorbjorklund 3mo ago
    But they all think it will not be them. Just like in Putins Russia.
Finnucane 3mo ago
Because they're not as much 'freedom loving' as they are 'selfish dicks.'
nkrisc 3mo ago
It’s not your freedom they care about.
sardine5 3mo ago
Christopher Harborne - not just a libertarian freedom loving crypto guy, but also the largest single shareholder of QinetiQ, a pretty notable UK Defence company.
mythrwy 3mo ago
[flagged]
- nemo 3mo ago
  Every time I see someone pearl-clutching about speaking honestly about fascists, my mental picture is unsympathetic as well. "Fascist" may be inflammatory but it's certainly not inaccurate. Fascists are a real part of the world, trying to language police them away doesn't work.
- kg 3mo ago
  It may make you uncomfortable to learn this but fascists - actual ones - are currently active in politics! My hair isn't dyed, for what it's worth. We could argue over the definition of fascism and which politicians fit it which might be more productive than accusing posters of being depressed.
  - mythrwy 3mo ago
    That is one option. Another is we discuss actual policy positions rather than using presumed pejoratives to brand everyone who doesn't agree with us as "literally Hitler!".
  - TFNA 3mo ago
    Fascism is a political phenomenon of the early twentieth century. There are no current politicians who are operating in the early twentieth century. So, to speak of “currently active fascists” is anachronistic. Typically at some point in the discussion someone will cite Umberto Eco’s definition of fascism, but other people do not have to accept his extension of the term past its sell-by date. For the people currently active in politics who espouse heinous policies sometimes (and sometimes not) reminiscent of fascism, then advocate against those policies directly. Using such a vague umbrella term, and one interpreted by many as a distinct cultural shibboleth, isn’t likely to win over the people you need in order to prevail.
    - saulapremium 3mo ago
cyberax 3mo ago
They're idiots. They think that they just need to be buddies with the leading fascist and they're going to be golden. They don't have enough knowledge or curiosity to study what happened EVERY time this was attempted. Hint: you might be buddies with the big fascist now, but this can change at any moment. And then you're just fodder for his _other_ cronies. Oh, and don't forget that even if you think that you're adept at court intrigue and covert ops, your _children_ might not be so skilled. Will they retain your fortune when the big fascist suddenly decides to... reallocate... some of their wealth?
victorbjorklund 3mo ago
Because they are not really true liberterians. They are more ”I wanna be free from rules but I want more rules for others”

It's not hard to figure out, the fascists have been more explicitly welcoming to crypto freedom or at least put themselves out there to solicit that vote even if you claim their underlying policies aren't. Trump offered the freedom of Ross Ulbricht at the libertarian convention, did Kamala come to the libertarian convention and offer anything?

pjc50 3mo ago
> Trump offered the freedom of Ross Ulbricht at the libertarian convention Libertarianism is when you can buy your way out of criminal convictions?
- mothballed 3mo ago
  Trump wasn't running on Libertarianism (you can argue he pretended to at the convention, but no one actually buy that) , he was running on "Neither one of us is offering you libertarianism, but I will at least come here and offer you something."
lostlogin 3mo ago
> did Kamala come to the libertarian convention and offer anything? I thought that offering ‘not Trump’ would be enough. I was very wrong.
ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
If you back fascists to promote crypto, your values are fucked.
- mothballed 3mo ago
  It's no wonder the fascists won the "libertarian" crypto vote when the message you and sister have for the comments as your campaign slogan to those voters is "your values are fucked" and "at least we're not the guy who showed up and offered you something." Did you think "your values are fucked" is actually persuasive at garnering votes?
  - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
    If libertarians can't parse than putting fascists in power is, long term, a bad fucking idea as demonstrated literally every time it's happened throughout history, I don't want their fucking vote. I'm not interested in their opinion about anything, especially this. It is not my nor anyone else's job, including Kamala's for that matter, to coddle your sweet little fee fees about wanting your fake power-wasting money to work. It is especially not anyone's job to tolerate socially corrosive viewpoints like fascism to indulge your ponzi scheme. Full stop. It's also well documented that fascists will happily enable and cosign the efforts of whatever their chosen right people are to steal money on industrial scales from everyone else, so they were always going to support crypto. Completely foregone conclusion and to be honest, I'd bet money that a notable amount of crypto figures did in fact know that and voted accordingly for the party that was prepared to let them get away with financial crimes, as they have done before, here and elsewhere. If you're so offended at the notion of someone saying your values are fucked, respectfully, un-fuck your values and then I won't have to say it anymore.
    - mothballed 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
        > You've answered the question as to why those people didn't support you I asked no such question. You said: > It's not hard to figure out, the fascists have been more explicitly welcoming to crypto freedom or at least put themselves out there to solicit that vote even if you claim their underlying policies aren't. To which I said: > If you back fascists to promote crypto, your values are fucked. This is not a statement wondering why they didn't. I know why they didn't, even if I didn't directly say it. I'm saying here if your support for proper policies or candidates is contingent on their supporting your stupid shitcoins, then your values are fucked and I'm not interested in your conclusions as a result. Or to be more specific, if you're prepared to give Fascists power because you think it'll be better for your coinbase account, your values are fucked. And while there is certainly a cost to having principles, to say that Kamala didn't win because she refused to court crypto is just ridiculously out-of-touch. That's a big question with a lot of variables, but I assure you things like: 1) Her being a woman 2) Her being non-white 3) Her being yet another pro-corpo do-nothing Democrat, with a back story including being a PROSECUTOR of all things Had a shitload, a metric assload, an utter container-ship load more to do with her defeat than anything even tangentially related to your weird secondary finance system, and on that point I would bet a lot of REAL, not crypto, currency. And here's the part you're missing about Trump and his ilk "showing up": that offer means nothing. Fascist regimes don't keep promises to their useful idiots, they keep them right up until they're not useful anymore. They'll feed your crypto conartists to the same wolves they'll feed me to, because nobody wins long-term under fascism, including the fascists who aren't currently holding the leash. Ross Ulbricht's pardon doesn't tell you Trump loves crypto freedom, it tells you Trump knows how to make a low-cost gesture to a bloc he needs this cycle. And frankly it tracks well that crypto holders were targeted by the Trump admin anyway, you're a self-selecting bloc of marks, ready and eager to hold ANOTHER bag to go with the one you've statistically speaking, already got. But far more importantly: Fascists are not shy about the Fascist shit they aim to do, namely to harm people at scale. If you cosign that for bitcoin, I'm not here to persuade you or win your heart: that is not a position that a reasonable person takes, and so I see no purpose in attempting to reason with you.

ratelimitsteve 3mo ago

if you're in with the fascists they are the most liberty-oriented party. you can do whatever you want, entirely without regard to the law.

mrguyorama 3mo ago
But this has never been true. Lots of valuable, productive, and loyal Nazis ended up in political prisoner camps. Because that kind of kleptocracy runs on constantly fighting factions and incentives and selfishness. The core belief is selling someone else down the river because you can.
- ratelimitsteve 2mo ago
  there's a difference between being a good and loyal fascist and being in with the fascists. you've actually hit on it. those valuable, productive and loyal nazis were allowed to do whatever they wanted without regard to the law when that benefited the party, then that same behavior that was legal and encouraged was what got them kidnapped and murdered by the party as soon as the winds shifted. The core belief of fascism is two-fold: selling someone down the river because you can and believing that either through compliance or raw power you'll never be the one sold down the river.
  - cindyllm 2mo ago
    [dead]
- victorbjorklund 3mo ago
  But they all think it will not be them. Just like in Putins Russia.

Finnucane 3mo ago

Because they're not as much 'freedom loving' as they are 'selfish dicks.'

nkrisc 3mo ago

It’s not your freedom they care about.

sardine5 3mo ago

Christopher Harborne - not just a libertarian freedom loving crypto guy, but also the largest single shareholder of QinetiQ, a pretty notable UK Defence company.

mythrwy 3mo ago

[flagged]

nemo 3mo ago
Every time I see someone pearl-clutching about speaking honestly about fascists, my mental picture is unsympathetic as well. "Fascist" may be inflammatory but it's certainly not inaccurate. Fascists are a real part of the world, trying to language police them away doesn't work.
kg 3mo ago
It may make you uncomfortable to learn this but fascists - actual ones - are currently active in politics! My hair isn't dyed, for what it's worth. We could argue over the definition of fascism and which politicians fit it which might be more productive than accusing posters of being depressed.
- mythrwy 3mo ago
  That is one option. Another is we discuss actual policy positions rather than using presumed pejoratives to brand everyone who doesn't agree with us as "literally Hitler!".
- TFNA 3mo ago
  Fascism is a political phenomenon of the early twentieth century. There are no current politicians who are operating in the early twentieth century. So, to speak of “currently active fascists” is anachronistic. Typically at some point in the discussion someone will cite Umberto Eco’s definition of fascism, but other people do not have to accept his extension of the term past its sell-by date. For the people currently active in politics who espouse heinous policies sometimes (and sometimes not) reminiscent of fascism, then advocate against those policies directly. Using such a vague umbrella term, and one interpreted by many as a distinct cultural shibboleth, isn’t likely to win over the people you need in order to prevail.
  - saulapremium 3mo ago

cyberax 3mo ago

They're idiots. They think that they just need to be buddies with the leading fascist and they're going to be golden. They don't have enough knowledge or curiosity to study what happened EVERY time this was attempted. Hint: you might be buddies with the big fascist now, but this can change at any moment. And then you're just fodder for his _other_ cronies. Oh, and don't forget that even if you think that you're adept at court intrigue and covert ops, your _children_ might not be so skilled. Will they retain your fortune when the big fascist suddenly decides to... reallocate... some of their wealth?

victorbjorklund 3mo ago

Because they are not really true liberterians. They are more ”I wanna be free from rules but I want more rules for others”