Bitcoin Böses Nazigeld – or the frustration of the left on your own monetary policy
Bitcoin Böses Nazigeld – or the frustration of the left on your own monetary policy
Fathers Stalin, the worst butcher, which Russia has ever seen, here in Cyan. Image by Andrew Kitzmiller via Flickr.com. License: Creative Commons
The left-wing extremist Internet magazine Volksbetzer finds that Bitcoin is a money for right-wing extremists with which neo-Nazis finance their terror. This is as silly as it is low and reveals much more about the state of today’s left than via Bitcoin.
It is a opinion article by Christoph Bergmann with partly polemical tendencies. This comment does not stand for the official policy of Bitcoinblog.de still for the attitude of Bitcoin.de. He is to be understood as a private political opinion of the author.
The Magazin Volksbetzer is actually known for firing on cross thinkers, vaccination opponents and RKI skeptics every day from all rhetorical mortars that fall into the hands of the authors. On Tuesday it came to the idea of aligning a gun against Bitcoin.
Hauke Cordts, former intern in the ÖR and former employee in the SPD press office, lists without an introductory explanation of which evil Nazis and right-wing extremists have already used Bitcoin in this world:
Nick Fuentes, a well-known US rights extreme, who was also involved in the “Sturm” on the Capitol, had previously 250.Received 000 dollars in Bitcoin. Stephan Balliet, the anti -Semitic assassin from Halle, received 0.1 Bitcoin in October 2019, then 750 euros. The Identitarian Movement called for Bitcoin donations in summer 2017 and actually received 50 euros in Bitcoin, and that from the Christchurch assassin from New Zealand.
It is known for a long time that good and decent people do not have a monopoly on the use of Bitcoin and, in a way, also makes sense of the matter. If only “the good” is allowed to do something, then you need an authority that decides who is good and who is evil and those against whom they decide, deprives the right of use. That is exactly what Bitcoin should prevent. Therefore, hackers, fraudsters, drug dealers and many other half sparks also use Bitcoin and, yes, also right -wing extremists, neo -Nazis, communists, kleptocrats, autocrats, paramilitaries and others.
We have also occasionally wrote about Bitcoin and neo -Nazis. Also use numerous US neo-Nazis Bitcoin Wallets about the examination that Cordts now quoted, and have also accumulated in some cases. Cordts quotes another study, of the blockchain analyst Elliptic, which comes to the conclusion that transactions of around $ 8.9 million are related to right-wing extremists.
So far so unsightly, but also inevitable. Which is why the Volksbetzer is now digging out all of this? And how does Cordts order this?
A testimony of deep hostility to freedom
On the one hand, the author recognizes the obvious: right -wing extremists use Bitcoin for pragmatic reasons. More and more payment service providers are blocking payments to mental arsonists from the right, which is why they have to receive money in Bitcoin. This is not nice, but confirms that Bitcoin works.
If the article from Cordts ended here, it would be okay and one could be happy to derive the claim that the protection of the constitution must also deal with Bitcoin transactions. Every organ that commissioned the collective of the individual for their actions should be competent to read the Bitcoin blockchain. This is my firm conviction, and this has been happening for a long time.
But of course the folk plaster is not concerned with. The author tries to generally smear Bitcoin with right -wing extremist colors. He would like to give the impression that Bitcoin is in a right -wing extremist, and bitcoiners are either neo -Nazis or would provide them with a help, voluntarily or involuntarily.
“The anchoring of the bitcoin in the right -wing extremist scene also have ideological reasons. Bitcoin is based on a deeply libertarian, anti-state and anti-etatist way of thinking … Bitcoin supporters and right-wing extremist democratic institutions of financial regulation reject. So it is not surprising that Richard Spencer, US pioneer of the new right and white supremacy activist, tweeted in 2017: “Bitcoin is the Currency of the Alt Right” (in German: Bitcoin is the currency of the Alt-Right movement).”
And with this passage, the Volksbetzer converts a previously moderately interesting article into a testimony of deep enemy of freedom: everything that even dares to long for freedom from the collective is – right -wing extremist. Libertar, i.e. people who reject the state – not anarchists, but right -wing extremists. Anti-technicians, i.e. people who do not find that the state is the solution to all problems-not liberals, but right-wing extremists. People who criticize or reject financial regulation – right -wing extremist.
As you can see, you have to beat a fairly wide bow to smear Bitcoin. However, this bow goes so huge that it raises quite a few questions.
Bitcoin is the opposite of right -wing extremist
What does right -wing extremism mean, and how does Bitcoin go into it? Wikipedia defines this political attitude as follows:
“Right -wing extremism is a collective drawing for ideologies, the common core of which is the overvaluation of ethnicity, the questioning of the equality of all people as well as an anti -pluralistic and authoritarian understanding of society.”
Even this first sentence shows that hardly anything can be removed from right -wing extremism than Bitcoin: Bitcoin knows neither ethnic affiliations nor differences between people. Bitcoin is a money that explicitly stands against authoritarian interventions in finance. So far Bitcoin is the smooth opposite of right -wing extremists. If you take Bitcoin as standard, any other money would be right -wing extremist.
This is followed by a section of conspiracy theories and right -wing extremists on Wikipedia. In my opinion, conspiracy theories are too politicized here, but that doesn’t matter, since Bitcoin neither anti -Semitic nor anti -American conspiracy theories play a role. So we come to the next paragraph:
“The structural characteristics of right-wing extremism include dogmatism, consciousness of shipment and a pronounced black and white thinking. In the political style you can see a affection of violence and the promotion of violence, which finds its expression, especially in verbal attacks on political opponents and dissenters.”
Of course, bitcoiners are broadcast. You have found the best money in the world and want to convince your fellow human beings of it. And of course there is also dogmatism and black and white thinking, for example when it comes to Ethereum or Bitcoin Cash. But basically the decision is to try it with a completely different, namely decentralized and purely virtual money, rather the opposite of dogmatism. Even violence cannot be attributed to a purely virtual money, especially since, unlike with all other currencies, no military is financed with Bitcoin.
I think I don’t have to go on. There are interfaces between libertarianism and right-wing extremism that appear uncomfortably in online magazines such as the axis of the good or peculiarly freely-I suspect that it is a certain penchant for social narwinism-but overall Bitcoin contradicts the characteristics of right-wing extremism that it is simply embarrassing and insincere to draw an ideological connection here.
Why does the folk plasterer do this? An online magazine that deals with right-wing extremism so often should have an editorial team that is able to understand the term. Since negligence is to be ruled out as an answer, only the intent remains: the folk petzer intentionally pretends Bitcoin and tries to do the club of right -wing extremism that has now been produced for left -wing extremist.
Why?
The authoritarian turn of the left
I can only express guessing here. An article by the left journalist Peter Nowak on Telepolis: “A year Lockdown and the authoritarian turn in the left”.
Nowak puzzles about the statement of Velten Schäffer in Friday that “quite a few who were located as links and despaired authority were suddenly caught in the uncritical distribution of Markus-Söder-Content. And others who thought they were under Basically received the accusation of almost sitting in the right -wing naval ship. How ‘authoritarian’ is when concern for the weakest? How ruthless, yes ‘fascistoid’ is when the throbbing is on the usual civil rights?”
Nowak experienced this himself. For example, the author seems to be able to publish it with his previous clients, usually left newspapers and magazines, because he has commented critically about the official Corona narrative a little too often too often. In an article in the left magazine, he finds an indication of what is happening, which writes about “Die Linke in Pandemie”.
Nowak is noticeable that the author “returns to the authoritarian methods of a 1970s link when the board members of communist small groups presume which books are perishable for the party members without even dealing with the incriminated articles.“These small parties are meaningless today, but“ the authoritarian spirit has remained. So he demands that speaking of Corona and the consequences must be broken. This is an expression of an authoritarian turn in the Corona debate.”
So the left was again authoritarian. If you have the story of the left or. of socialism, from Stalin to Mao to the Baaht parties in Syria and Iraq, should not be surprised. Rather, one wonders, as a liberal with Hayek and Mises and Berlin, how the world could overlook this. Left or. Socialist parties always want to exchange freedom for solidarity. You want the individual to submit to the collective.
In the Corona crisis, the last scraps of fabric that had covered this shape of the left. Contradiction to the official opinion of Corona – not tolerated, harmful, right -wing extremist. Physical self -determination in times of pandemic – selfish, socially harmful, right -wing extremist. Demonstrations for the Basic Law and against the compulsion to cover the veil – right -wing extremists on marches.
The representative projects his own right -wing extremist characteristics?
The reflexively presented defamation of non-leftists, whether they are bourgeois, legal, individualistic, cross-thinking, libertarian, patriotic or whatever, as a right-wing extremist, always as a right-wing extremist, is ridiculous, especially in times of Corona. Let’s look again at Wikipedia:
They “justify a low value and legal status of certain individuals and groups through ethnic, cultural, spiritual and biological differences. This inevitably follows friend-enemy attitudes and intolerance towards people of other origin and imprint … The social disputes and disagreements are considered harmful to the community. The cause of social conflicts is seen in the inequality of people. Individual self -determination and equal opportunities are combated in favor of social unit compulsion.”
This writes Wikipedia about right -wing extremism. Corona pandemic has made our society right-wing extremist? Unpolished are withdrawn rights because of their biological state, lateral thinkers are defamed as a “appendix” because of their intellectual preferences from public service broadcasting. If you don’t think of Corona with Drosten, Lauterbach and Wieler, you will not find a tolerance for his opinion, but see himself quickly hostile and defamed, sometimes as a science den, sometimes as a cynic, sometimes as a neo -Nazi. The plurality of opinions is clearly understood as harmful to the health of the folk body, which is why the left welcomes it, yes, demands that large capitalist large corporations censor. And physical self -determination of the individual in the vaccination question is decidedly suppressed and fought.
The Volksbetzer is in all of this from the line of government and RKI. So it looks like it is a magazine that embodies significantly more characteristics of right -wing extremism than Bitcoin.
When monetary policy is collectivized but still fails
However, this projection of right -wing extremist characteristics on Bitcoin is far from the only reason for the folk plasterer to slander cryptocurrency and its users. Even the minor -intelligent, the complexity of reality too simplified temptation, everyone who contradicts, is not yet everything.
In fact, the left, which is now bluntly authoritarian, says a few things that Bitcoin embodies, more than anything: individualism, wealth, economic freedom.
A similar dilemma can currently be observed on the left as with the Soviets. Alexander Solschenizyn described this in his monumental work “Der Archipel Gulag” cruelly detailed:
The Soviets had slaughtered the economic independence of the individual, collectivized the product and handed over every economic decision to a politically appointed representative of the collective. Since these were not experts, they made stupid decisions that, at best, led to chaos and production failures and, in the worst case, for hunger death of ten or hundreds of thousands.
Many engineers warned the Soviets of these wrong decisions, but it was in vain. When the reality finally catched up with the Soviet decision -makers, they accused the engineers they warned to sabotage production. The engineers wandered to the Gulags, where they worked in mountain or road construction in Siberia, while the representatives of the collective continued to scored nonsensical decisions and sent further scapegoats to Siberia.
The example is, of course, drastic. But there are structural similarities: monetary policy has been completely collectivated and the central banks were handed over, and the state and tax rate increases continuously. The left -wing extremists have what they want: the instruments to influence economic processes by politically used representatives of the collective – to answer economic constraints or incentives with political goals. The misconception of being able to control everything centrally is one of the dogms of left -wing economic policy. Against all empiricism, they are convinced that the state can do it better.
The result of this left -wing politics is tragic, and also ironic if one assumes that the reduction of inequality is a genuine goal of left -wing politics: the policy of central banks has led to an extreme tightening of inequality since 2009. Inflation- the use of use and above all of the wealth goods- made the poor poorer and the rich richer. The super rich have never been so super rich, and never – or at least for a very long time – it was so difficult to finance a home with a normal income.
So we have the situation that a left -wing politics could do exactly what a left -wing politics demands, but has achieved a result that is exactly the opposite of left -wing goals. In a blatant form, this also happened in the Soviet Union when political squad dismissed the engineers and entrepreneurs. If someone consistently believes in left -wing goals, such as the elimination of oppression and the reduction of inequality, then he should look very critically at the left -wing politics and ask how it could happen that left -wing politics has almost always achieved the opposite of what she was up to. Above all, however, he should greet alternatives, such as Bitcoin, with impartiality.
But just as the anger of the Soviet squads were against those who had warned and offered alternatives, the left -wing extremists of the folk tensioner turn their frustration against Bitcoin – against the alternative to and the way out of their own politics. If you point to others with your finger, you can save yourself the mental effort to reflect on your own actions. Laziness is one of the largest underestimated powers in the world.
Hauke Cordts has been practicing in this discipline for a long time, for example when he abits Bitcoin as a ponzi or cheered the MMT, the leftist and remarkable of all economic disciplines.
His aversion to Bitcoin – and that of the left in general – has nothing to do with neo -Nazis, but a lot with the fact that your own economic policy ideals turned out to be a perfect tubular crepe.
In the victim role
The whole thing had an aftermath, which is so typical that it already tastes quite a bit: after Hauke Cordts practically all the bitcoiners as a right -wing extremist – whether consciously or unconsciously, whether as a leading perpetrator or helper against the will, he was contradicted on Twitter.
Many bitcoiners, in a very polite and factual way, show that Bitcoin is not right -wing extremists. That the proportion of transactions in connection with right -wing extremists with $ 8.9 million is extremely tiny. That right -wing extremists also drink water and use Twitter. And so forth. But Cordts or the Volksbetzer did not answer. Cordts blocked and blocked and blocked.
And of course he then stood in the victim role:
https: // Twitter.Com/Hauke_cordts/Status/148639234157036545
Everything as usual and we certainly don’t experience it for the last time. Extremists don’t want to discuss.