Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!
They are not, in fact, launching a cryptocurrency.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Boxturret
Oct 3, 2013

Don't ask me about Sonic the Hedgehog diaper fetish

Paladinus posted:

They are not, in fact, launching a cryptocurrency.

how else can digital dollars exist if not satoshi's famous cryptosproridum? only a certified genius future alien could come up with such a thing

divabot
Jun 17, 2015

A polite little mouse!
news: El Salvador Colon-Dollars.

has anyone said "colondollar" yet

Honest Thief
Jan 11, 2009

divabot posted:

news: El Salvador Colon-Dollars.

has anyone said "colondollar" yet

con dolor

FAUXTON
Jun 2, 2005

spero che tu stia bene


lol

Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!

Sit amet?

EIDE Van Hagar
Dec 8, 2000

Beep Boop

ADINSX posted:

I'm not reading all of that but just based on the blurb in the tweet it looks like they're proposing the government would launch their OWN cryptocurrency.

Which is the part I've never understood about crypto enthusiasts, even if the problems did magically work out and it scaled and people just decided they never needed chargebacks or the ability to reclaim stolen money again or the thousand other problems all of this nonsense has, why would I want YOUR coin, vs the governments coin that my job would actually pay me in and the government would force businesses to accept?

because your job is selling heroin and doing murders for hire.and they pay you in bitcoin.

also your primary monthly expenses are heroin and murders for hire, as well. so you can just put that on auto pay.

and you live in a hyper capitalist dystopia where the government has withered to a vestigial homunculus when compared to how it works today. all the government does is fill potholes, and deny unemployment claims

EorayMel
May 30, 2015

WE GET IT. YOU LOVE GUN JESUS. Toujours des fusils Bullpup Français.

EIDE Van Hagar posted:

because your job is selling heroin and doing murders for hire.and they pay you in bitcoin.

also your primary monthly expenses are heroin and murders for hire, as well. so you can just put that on auto pay.

and you live in a hyper capitalist dystopia where the government has withered to a vestigial homunculus when compared to how it works today. all the government does is fill potholes, and deny unemployment claims

ok but where does leaving my car idling 24/7 in my driveway to produce solved sudokus come into play???????????????????????????????????????????????

ADINSX
Sep 9, 2003

Wanna run with my crew huh? Rule cyberspace and crunch numbers like I do?

EIDE Van Hagar posted:

all the government does is fill potholes,

We already have dominos for that though

Alan Smithee
Jan 4, 2005


A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...
https://twitter.com/koryodynasty/status/1418600598631436293?s=20

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/25/asia/south-korea-broadcaster-blunder-olympics-intl/index.html

quote:

When Italy walked on, the broadcaster pulled up an image of a pizza. For Norway, a salmon fillet was shown. An image of Dracula was used for Team Romania. And for Team El Salvador, a country where Bitcoin is legal tender, a picture representing the cryptocurrency was shown.

what did the El Salvador people do to deserve this

Boxturret
Oct 3, 2013

Don't ask me about Sonic the Hedgehog diaper fetish

Alan Smithee posted:

what did the El Salvador people do to deserve this

elect this guy

ymgve
Jan 2, 2004


:dukedog:
Offensive Clock
did they actually elect him, or did he elect himself

Hammerite
Mar 9, 2007

And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.
Jade Ear Joe
in this moment, i am euphoric. not because of any phony fiat money, but because i am elected by my own crypto farts

Weatherman
Jul 30, 2003

WARBLEKLONK
that's fuckin deep man are you some kind of professional "quote maker"?

Powder keg
Jul 25, 2021

by Fluffdaddy

quote:

Amazon has confirmed to Business Insider that it is going to accept cryptocurrencies, but did not reveal when exactly this is set to happen. 

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amazon-set-to-accept-cryptocurrency

& taproot locked in for block 709,632.

lmao x999999

lmao forever

njsykora
Jan 23, 2012

Robots confuse squirrels.


quote:

What remains to be seen is how Amazon plans to mitigate volatility of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin that can fluctuate significantly even during a week. Perhaps, the company will simply convert Bitcoins to real money quickly. Alternatively, it may attempt to make some additional profits by waiting till a digital currency goes up in price.

yes, they'll simply convert the notoriously slow to convert fake money to real money quickly

Beelzebufo
Mar 5, 2015

Frog puns are toadally awesome


Why would anyone spend their precious bits on worthless amazon products, now that Amazon accepting bitcoins as payment will rocket their value up to the moon :thunk:

Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!
Amazon is about to accept bitcoins! We know it because they have a job listed for someone who knows about blockchains.

KnifeWrench
May 25, 2007

Practical and safe.

Bleak Gremlin

Paladinus posted:

Amazon is about to accept bitcoins! We know it because they have a job listed for someone who knows about blockchains.

they tried asking the people who already work there, but they must not have known much, because they kept explaining it wrong. it couldn't possibly be that stupid

LanceHunter
Nov 12, 2016

Beautiful People Club


Here is the actual job listing that is causing the bitcoin price jump, for the curious...

Digital Currency and Blockchain Product Lead

quote:

DESCRIPTION
Do you want to innovate on behalf of customers within the payments and financial systems of one of the largest e-commerce companies in the world? As one of the largest e-commerce companies in the world, Amazon processes billions of secure on-line transactions via numerous payment methods and capabilities around the globe. The Amazon Payment Acceptance & Experience Team is responsible for how Amazon’s customers pay on Amazon’s sites and through Amazon’s services around the globe.

The Payments Acceptance & Experience team is seeking an experienced product leader to develop Amazon’s Digital Currency and Blockchain strategy and product roadmap. You will leverage your domain expertise in Blockchain, Distributed Ledger, Central Bank Digital Currencies and Cryptocurrency to develop the case for the capabilities which should be developed, drive overall vision and product strategy, and gain leadership buy-in and investment for new capabilities. You will work closely with teams across Amazon including AWS to develop the roadmap including the customer experience, technical strategy and capabilities as well as the launch strategy.

You’ll need to operate with a high level of autonomy and operate analytically, working backwards from data and customer insights to build new and innovative solutions to unsolved problems. As a product leader you will have a proven track record of creating a strong vision and roadmap and successfully delivering results. In this role, you will:
· Own the vision and strategy for Amazon’s Digital Currency and Blockchain strategy and product roadmap
· Write documents that work backwards from customer and partner needs
· Dive deep into customer and system data to perform analysis
· Partner effectively with other leaders in product, design, marketing, engineering, science and business intelligence to influence priorities and drive alignment
· Maintain excellent judgment on prioritization between focusing features, architectural improvements and operational excellence
· Monitor project execution and ensuring that the project delivery is to the appropriate levels of quality and in line with target dates

Shame Boy
Mar 2, 2010

LanceHunter posted:

Do you want to innovate on behalf of customers within the payments and financial systems of one of the largest e-commerce companies in the world?

no

Shame Boy
Mar 2, 2010

god something about the phrase "innovate on behalf of customers" is just so gross and weird in a way I can't quite articulate but it's really bothering me

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

you think this amazon thing is good for bitcoin? even better news is coming soon!

Tether Executives Said to Face Criminal Probe Into Bank Fraud

njsykora
Jan 23, 2012

Robots confuse squirrels.


customers love companies that innovate in payment systems! because real people absolutely give a poo poo about the mechanics of a company taking their money!

FAUXTON
Jun 2, 2005

spero che tu stia bene

LanceHunter posted:

Here is the actual job listing that is causing the bitcoin price jump, for the curious...

Digital Currency and Blockchain Product Lead

I'll tell em it's dumb as poo poo for free

ymgve
Jan 2, 2004


:dukedog:
Offensive Clock

Shame Boy posted:

god something about the phrase "innovate on behalf of customers" is just so gross and weird in a way I can't quite articulate but it's really bothering me

one could interpret that as their "customers" actually being he businesses that sell things on amazon, or companies that use AWS, that makes a little more sense

Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!

FAUXTON posted:

I'll tell em it's dumb as poo poo for free

I'll tell them it's dumb for money.

Alan Smithee
Jan 4, 2005


A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0gAxuvo5rc

bitcoin baby it's a crash crash crash

LordSaturn
Aug 12, 2007

sadly unfunny

Chalks posted:

you think this amazon thing is good for bitcoin? even better news is coming soon!

Tether Executives Said to Face Criminal Probe Into Bank Fraud

this criminal probe is for unrelated financial fraud in the corrupt old system,

FAUXTON
Jun 2, 2005

spero che tu stia bene

Paladinus posted:

I'll tell them it's dumb for money.

It would follow that I'd happily take their money as well

Powder keg
Jul 25, 2021

by Fluffdaddy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owb84lhyqVg

Powder keg
Jul 25, 2021

by Fluffdaddy
Let's see what you're made of yospos. This person made some excellent points, and cited their work with respectable academic rigor. GBS was extremely unimpressive.

magusperivallon posted:

I came across this recently: https://www.somethingawful.com/news/attack-of-bitcoins/1/. So, after lurking a bit, I thought it was time to join the conversation.

Who am I? I'm a computer nerd, like some of you... I knew about Bitcoin in the early days, but like a lot of other computer nerds who didn't understand money, I let my wallet crash and burn with a long deceased laptop. I was agnostic about Bitcoin, but I was also allergic to finance, so until I had an actual use case in 2018, I wasn't convinced that I needed it in my life.

I've been through the stages. "Transactions fees are too high for micro-transactions!" and "Bitcoin is bad for the environment", are the big ones for me. Eventually, I had to decide whether I was a walking contradiction, because I'm also a physicist and I do research on climate change mitigation/adaptation (mostly feeling like it's adaptation these days). Like many people, I border on hope and despair. What I am sharing with you now, is the culmination of what I've concluded. I have citations for all claims listed, but it's a pain to add them into a forum post, so I can share them on a case-by-case basis, should someone need a source.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

---

Contents
Introduction / Financialization: A backdrop for understanding inaction on climate change and Bitcoin's role
Bitcoin as a vehicle for system change
Bitcoin's environmental impact
For a habitable future, we must stop financialization

---

**Introduction**

We need a major system disruption in order to make the transformative societal change that is necessary to stop the planet from warming humans into extinction. Bitcoin, the decentralized digital currency, may be the very disruption that we need. Bitcoin is transferred over a peer-to-peer network and its' transactions are verified using network nodes that must solve cryptographic puzzles. Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin white paper in 2008, and the currency was first used in 2009. Bitcoin has the potential to disrupt the existing and entrenched financial system which has stymied climate change action, thus giving us an opening for transformative change.

Within certain circles, claiming that Bitcoin can save us from climate catastrophe is controversial. It is especially so to those who are keenly tuned into the issues that we face with respect to the unfolding climate crisis. After all, Bitcoin mining is a critical component of the coin's network, and its process of mining (proof-of-work) is designed to consume energy to secure the network. It is likely that if you dislike Bitcoin because of the energy concerns, it is because this use of energy sounds extraordinarily wasteful and therefore is only an added burden on our already carbon-overloaded atmosphere and ocean. It is only a negative if we assume that Bitcoin has no purpose, is merely another useless speculative product and which is an institution that cannot adapt to a net-negative emissions landscape. In fact, Bitcoin serves a very valuable purpose and already has significant experiments ongoing. Moreover, Bitcoin is not an institution that cannot adapt to external pressures.

I argue that Bitcoin, as designed, serves as a catalyst for system change because it aims to destroy the very central villain that is stopping us from preventing the planet from warming us into extinction. This villain is the financial system and its stranglehold on the entire globe through the financialization of our national economies and nature. In order to understand Bitcoin's role in this, we must first understand how our financial system and economy work.


**Financialization: A backdrop for understanding inaction on climate change and Bitcoin's role**

*Financialization Is Wealth Transfer from the Many to the Few*

Our financial system is run by a network of Wall Street players who move through a revolving door, from private to public, within the global banking system. Thanks to the 2007–08 financial crisis, many of these banks and their practices are well known to us. Banks like Wells Fargo, HSBC, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase, along with hedge funds and other major institutional players on Wall Street, are responsible for destroying millions of lives due to risky and reckless practices. Instead of their bad behavior putting them out of business, they were rewarded with bailouts and very little changes in the rules that govern their harmful practices. As a result, they continue to put our economies at risk and ergo, put nearly everyone at risk of financial ruin.

Not just banks, but the people who run them are part of this revolving door system. President Obama's own economic team during the 2008 crisis included many members of the banking system, here's just a handful: Mark Patterson, treasury secretary's chief of staff, a former Goldman Sach's lobbyist. Larry Summers, Obama's chief economic adviser, made $5 million as managing director of a hedge fund. Gary Gensler, Chairman of Commodity Futures Trading Commission, spent 18 years at Goldman Sachs where he was made partner. Gensler is now President Biden's SEC Chairman. Ben Bernanke, Chair of the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis, went on to work for Citadel, the hedge fund beleaguered by the GameStop short controversy and also joined Pimco, an investment firm, as an advisor. President Biden's Secretary of the Treasury, Janet Yellen, while seeming to be little more than a public servant, received over $7 million in speaking fees from banks like Barclays, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Citadel, after she left the Federal Reserve in 2016. Many of Biden's aides, as revealed in a 2020 CNBC investigation, have "deep ties to the business world". Republicans are no different, but Democrats are particularly hypocritical in this area.

These financial players do not care about the people they hurt, let alone the planet. They care only about short-term profit. Worst of all, as noted above, the same bankers who carelessly play God with our welfare are the same bankers who end up running our governments' financial institutions. In particular, they manage the central banks that nearly every country has and uses to control currency and interest rates. This sounds innocent and detached from the average person's day-to-day lives, but in reality, the actions of the central banks play a bigger role in our pedestrian lives than even our local governments do. The US Federal Reserve sets goals for employment, for inflation, and for interest rates which affect your ability to take out a loan to buy a car or a home, for example. Through certain monetary policies and (in)actions, the Federal Reserve can destabilize markets, causing market crashes and recessions. In fact, in late June of this year, Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren warned that the "long periods of very low interest rates [which the Fed introduced in response to the pandemic] do encourage people to take risk" and that the Federal Reserve needed to watch for financial stability risk and rising home prices as a result of its own monetary policies.

In post-industrial societies like the United States, financialization has entrenched the grip and power of the banking system. The history of financialization can be traced back to the fall of the Bretton Woods agreement and Nixon taking the US dollar off the gold standard in 1971. Other factors come from the rise of neoliberalism in response to failing Keynesian policies. Neoliberalism promotes a free-market and anti-democratic agenda under the guise of "human dignity and individual freedom" (sounds a lot like right-wing libertarianism, doesn't it?). Ultimately, its ideology claims to be against the state, but really it relies on state violence to open markets for the free-flow of capital. Financialization is a process in which the financial sector becomes the dominate factor in an economy. It is a process in which income is transferred from the real sector to the financial sector, leading to wage stagnation and income inequality. According to Thomas I Palley of the Political Economy Research Institute, "there are reasons to believe that financialization may render the economy prone to risk of debt-deflation and prolonged recession." John R. Balder, a global strategist who has investigated the links between financialization and rising income and wealth inequality, noted in an article that the result of 40-years of financialization of the US economy has been wage stagnation for the bottom 90% of U.S. households, rising debt loads and overall economic insecurity. He argues that "the role of speculative finance (financialization) and the complicity of the central bank" is driving this growing inequality. Since the 1980s, financialization caused a divestment from factories and production coupled with an increase in investment in financial tools that would increase profit from securitization.

Indeed, during the pandemic, we saw a type of recovery known as a K-shaped recovery, in which one group saw the crisis dissipate much faster than the other. The wealthier you were, the more disconnected you were from the plight of the average worker because your recovery was likely dependent on the stock market's recovery and thus the recovery of various financial assets. The stock market's COVID-recovery was the fastest recovery ever seen (thanks to the central bank's use of quantitative easing). This was great for the banks, investors and hedge funds. For everyone else who isn't in the higher income brackets, especially those who were labeled "frontline workers" (farm workers, grocery store workers, etc.), the recovery may only be a distant dream.

The point must be well understood that financialization is bad for 99% of the global population. While my examples are mainly focused on what has happened in the United States, similar is happening across the globe under the economic ideology of neoliberalism, which came into being in the 1980s. Moreover, US monetary policy has historically set the stage for international monetary policy. Financialization and the public and private banking systems as they operate today not only harm people but also our planet, the only habitable world that we have. No matter what Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos think, there is no planet that we can move to that will serve as a second Earth; a feudalistic and franksteined Mars is not the dystopian reality that we should want for future generations.

*Financialization Harms the Environment and Prevents Climate Change Related Solutions*

According to the Institute for Policy Studies, banks are the largest investors in fossil fuels. Not only this, but central banks who adopted quantitative easing (QE) in response to the 2008 financial crisis pumped $6 trillion globally, but this additional liquidity did nothing for "green" investment. Instead, according to the Institute, QE funneled money toward polluters. Financialization has weakened the so-called free market and the ability of private firms to successfully develop competitive low-carbon or zero-carbon technologies. According to the Bank for International Settlements, financialization harms innovation. Max Jerneck, at the Mistra Center for Sustainable Markets, wrote in a study that this happens because innovative firms "operate by creating intangible future assets that are difficult to collateralize".

Tamra L Gilbertson notes in a 2020 paper, that the rise in finance in the role of climate change mitigation parallels the rise in financialization. She writes that "the role of powerful states and their capitalist allies are central to the process of expanding capital accumulation through financialization" and that this is also true for the financialization of climate change policies. In her paper, "Financialization of nature and climate change policy: implications for mining-impacted Afro-Colombian communities", she writes that the marketization of nature is a result of documents produced at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Here, the partnership between public and private sector "satisfied the interest of states and extractive corporations under the rhetoric of sustainable development" and that the resulting new nature-derived financial instruments were "often written, guided, lobbied for, and organized by representatives of fossil fuel corporations and northern-based conservation NGOs." The most apparent example of a climate mitigation instrument is carbon trading, which allows "polluting corporations to buy their way out of reducing pollution."

Both Gilbertson and Jerneck give practical examples of how financialization has stymied and hurt our ability to stop climate change. Gilbertson highlights the effect of carbon trading in Colombia where a carbon tax with a provision for using carbon emission offsets allows polluters to claim carbon neutrality and avoid taxation. As a result, polluting companies like coal mines in the region can continue to pollute the local Afro-Colombian communities and release CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. Furthermore, these coal companies are involved in commodifying local forests to be sold as units of credit on a carbon market. The polluters understand that through creating these financial assets, they can also generate wealth without having to shift their mining practices because they are "carbon neutral". This of course, is a fallacy, because there is a limit to what forests can sequester, forests are not an infinite carbon sink. As temperatures rise, the ability of forests to sequester carbon diminishes, thus, creating a carbon positive output.

Jerneck highlights how during the 1970–80s, financialization stymied the development of the solar industry in the United States. Because venture capitalists lacked interest in investing in innovation that would not provide short-term profit gains, there was little money available for entrepreneurs to develop the technology. The entrepreneurs who understood the technology best, were locked out of the financial sphere and eventually were forced to become part of financial conglomerates, which were highly centralized and did not understand the technology. This gave Japanese photovoltaic entrepreneurs an advantage and ultimately the conglomerates failed to make photovoltaics economically viable. In Japan, production and financial capital were not as disconnected as they are in the United States. Jerneck argues that in the United States there exists an "inherent tension between entrepreneurial and financial components of innovation. Recognizing this tension is crucial to understand the challenge of industrial transformation required to avoid catastrophic climate change." So long as it is easier to make money from speculation, investments in innovation will be avoided. Today, China generally dominates the photovoltaics industry.

The combination of the dominance of speculation over enterprise and the increasing role of the stock market in corporate control undermines our society's ability to innovate its way out of a crisis like climate change. When the main goal of a corporation is for short-term enrichment of investors, what money is left for improving long-term technological research and development? Jerneck makes it clear, "Instead of serving industrial development, finance had come to serve itself." 

As a result, we are on a high-speed train that is about to take 8 billion people off a climate catastrophe cliff. Financialization has created a system that is no longer attached to the real world. It is strictly based on increasing one's wealth without actually creating new wealth (also known as rent-seeking) rather than through production and innovative technologies. This likely explains why Bill Gates bought up a large amount of farmland and why Americans are being outbid on single family homes, when giant investors move-in and buy up blocks of houses for the sole purpose of renting them to the very people they out-bid. If we are feeling like our future is being stolen from us because of inaction from political leaders on climate change, then there is one obvious reason for this, and that is the stranglehold of the financial sector on our society. Keeping the planet from warming us into near-term extinction is irrelevant while you can still turn a quick profit and build a rich-person's oasis on Mars. After all, the space race is now a dystopian one among the wealthiest men on the planet. First one off this hellscape wins the prize.

---

**Bitcoin as a vehicle for system change**

The goal here isn't to focus on all the details of the shifting economic landscape but to argue why Bitcoin is the kind of disruption that we need to stop the global climate from warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius. However, the reader must understand the dire situation we are in before such an argument can be made. We are living through an entrenched financial system that has no regard for our environment nor for people. Protests have put some pressure on the financial markets (such as the divestment movement), but as shown, the worst crimes in this sector go unpunished and allow corporations and banks to escape responsibility. The players involved have an unquenchable thirst for profit and they also make economic policy for our governments. The central banks are complicit and contribute to the financialization problem. Our political leaders can only imagine incremental steps toward change so long as these small changes do not upset the entrenched financial system. Even some self-described socialist leaders are unable to conceptualize a world without the system as it exists today. Their vision is only a modification of the one that exists now, based on a belief that if they control it, they will do better. There is no evidence that a shift in leadership will do this because the problems are institutionalized, much like racism is institutionalized in the justice system. Therefore, we are only left with drastic choices.

Continuing with the high-speed train analogy, there is only one way to stop the train from taking every human on this planet with it over the cliff of climate change tipping points and irreversible feedback loops. The solution is radical, and it is to derail and cripple the existing financial system. This is where Bitcoin comes in.

*Bitcoin's threat to the existing system*

Bitcoin is deceptively simple. The point of Bitcoin is to create a monetary system that exists outside of the current system that among other things, gave us climate change which is the greatest market failure in the history of humanity. The rest of what makes Bitcoin compelling is up to interpretation and there is a diversity of reasons to be attracted to the idea that it is. As a result, we must dispel with the myth that Bitcoin is a system without value because the value comes from its sole purpose to exist.

There is a lot of misunderstanding of Bitcoin because of the proliferation of other cryptocurrencies and the fact that among the first people to get Bitcoin are right wing libertarians and followers of Austrian school economists like Mises and Rothbard ("anarcho"-capitalists). Moreover, because Bitcoin's price has skyrocketed, there are many people who wish to replicate it for the sole purpose of getting rich quickly. Therefore, we have seen many scams come out of the cryptocurrency space (and plenty of shills, like Spike Lee shilling for a high-fees ATM). Scams and shills, however, do not mean Bitcoin is useless or just speculation.

Beyond the scams and shills, there is no other cryptocurrency that has done what Bitcoin has done thus far. There is no other cryptocurrency, controversy aside, that can claim to be a country's legal tender, for example. With the addition of the Lightning network as a layer 2 protocol, there is also no need for nearly all other blockchains that are currently in existence (Monero stands out as a worthwhile alternative and complement).

The Lightning network, first proposed in a white paper in 2015, solves issues related to scalability, rapid settlement, low transaction fees, and privacy through the implementation of channels which operate similar to the Tor network. Of course, Lightning is not an immaculate conception of perfected money transactability, it is not without its issues, but through community development, these can be either improved, or Lightning can be replaced with something better, as that is invariably the case with digital technology.

Let's examine Bitcoin from a more technological perspective. We must consider Bitcoin in a different light from what many of us who are concerned about the climate have traditionally viewed it, namely fake money that increases CO2 emissions and which serves only to produce pump-and-dump speculative behavior. First, we must think of Bitcoin in the historical context of the Internet and the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP). TCP/IP are a set of rules that make communication possible between computers. Without TCP/IP, we would not be able to watch movies on Netflix, receive e-mail, or chat on Discord. Most people are not aware of the power of these communication rules, but the World Wide Web would not have been possible without them. TCP/IP existed before the World Wide Web was created, and the World Wide Web is a layer that improved on TCP/IP, making it possible for interconnected web pages to exist. The Web introduced a new computer protocol to the world called the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) and revolutionized the way society interacts on nearly every level. In the same way, Bitcoin is like the TCP/IP layer for a type of electronic monetary system and a layer 2 protocol like Lightning is like the World Wide Web, but in this case, it interconnects quotidian financial transactions. Like the Internet and Web, Bitcoin has the potential to disrupt and improve lives, but it can potentially allow for new kinds of monsters to be born. The difference between the Web and Bitcoin, however, is that because Bitcoin is based on a decentralized blockchain, it is therefore part of a greater movement toward the re-decentralization of the Internet. As a quick aside, what this means is that there is a lot of room left for human rights minded people to get involved and have an impact on technology and society in a way that was not previously possible (see getdweb.net for more information).

Second we must acknowledge its real-world use cases. As mentioned, Lightning network makes it possible for Bitcoin to be used in regular, everyday purchases because fees are much lower than on the main network. Today, using the Lightning network and Bitrefill, Bitcoin can be used to buy groceries, airplane tickets, or dinner. Bitcoin can be used to pay podcasters by the minute. While you stream a podcast, you can stream revenue back to them over the Lightning network. This happens instantaneously, without a payment processor like Stripe or PayPal taking a minimum 3% cut. More importantly, without fear of being de-platformed because a payment processor doesn't like the kind of content you produce. Sex workers in particular are at risk of de-platforming from the payment processing system. Recently, a supporter of the Tor network, which provides Internet anonymity for those living under oppressive regimes, was banned from PayPal for using his account to pay for cloud hosting of Tor nodes. Finally, when the US government pressured payment processors including credit card companies and PayPal to de-platform Julian Assange, he turned to Bitcoin to keep Wikileaks alive. To reiterate, the mere fact that an alternative, decentralized and censorship-resistant Internet money exists outside of the financial system gives it value.

Given the the historical, technological and use case examination, it starts to become clear that Bitcoin is disruptive and transformative in the same way that the Internet was at the turn of the last century. Carol Alexander, a cryptocurrency expert at the University of Sussex in the United Kingdom was quoted in Foreign Policy this year as saying, "They're reinventing what finance is, and it's sort of going under the radar of the establishment…They're not using standard products. They're not using standard trading protocols… It's a revolution led by young people, computer science geeks…" This means that the central banking system is already a decade behind the Bitcoin community when it comes to digital currency.

This is why Bitcoin can potentially help us stop climate change from getting worse. We know that the financial sector is strangling innovation, that the banks are funneling money to oil companies, and that the central banks are complicit through projects like quantitative easing. We cannot expect the existing structure to give us the opportunity we need to transform the system when we ask them to. So far, they have made it clear through our politicians, that very little will change. As stated, Bitcoin's goal is to exist outside of the current monetary structure, and this alone is disruptive enough. In fact, we know that it is having a disruptive effect because central banks are starting to get nervous. The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) wants central banks to develop and issue their own central bank digital currencies to compete with Bitcoin. While BIS correctly understood that financialization undermines innovation, they incorrectly claim that Bitcoin is harmful to the public good when it is in fact an innovation the undermines financialization. Bitcoin undermines financialization because it threatens the main players (bankers, institutional investors, hedge funds) who run our global financial system.

Greek economist Yannis Varoufaukis is well known among progressive and socialist circles. He is opposed to the adoption of Bitcoin because he believes it will cause a kind of feudalism where early adopters will run this new world. There is evidence that suggests this may not be true and Varofaukis makes a valid point, but arguing this is not within the scope of this paper. From a climate change perspective, Bitcoin serves primarily as a vehicle to disrupt the existing system enough to create an opening for transformative change, hopefully enraging populations enough to take real action against those who have sent us down this path of self-destruction.

There is one issue with Varoufaukis's anti-Bitcoin stance that is worth addressing here. He is a proponent of a central bank digital currency. He agrees that we need to cut out the middleman, but he overlooks some important aspects of what this would mean. Mainly that a central bank digital currency (CBDC) in no way prevents the further entrenchment of the surveillance state. Varoufakis makes the outrageous claim that a CBDC would be anonymous. This is a huge claim without any basis in reality because governments abhor encryption and privacy. He also ignores the reality that a CBDC would not prevent a new form of feudalism because the central banks are complicit in the creation of what Varofaukis calls, techno-feudalism, which he argues has replaced capitalism. The same Wall St players that currently move through the public and private banking sectors would still be running the central banks, thus propping up the very system that is making this new economics possible. The same problems with financialization would exist in a CBDC world, making it impossible for us to act quickly to stop the planet from warming even more.

Furthermore, a central banking digital coin, with all the qualities of Bitcoin, but only under the power of a central authority, would mean states have much more power and control over our lives than ever before. We can no longer accept incremental changes or these sleights-of-hand.

One might claim that the central point of this argument is somewhat incorrect because institutional investors and bankers are paying attention to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Goldman Sachs recently published a pamphlet on investing in Bitcoin and Ethereum as stores of value. Yet, it seems that these investors are only looking at cryptocurrency as a high-risk asset class in which to generate short-term profit during periods of high market volatility. The Wall Street institutional investors appear to not be interested in Bitcoin as a viable currency. Their role in the community tends to exist outside of Bitcoin's. In particular, JP Morgan Chase, Microsoft and Intel formed the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, which should make anyone serious about challenging the existing system suspicious of Ethereum.

Bitcoin is as revolutionary as the World Wide Web was at the turn of the century. The Web was misunderstood early on as well. Over 30 years later, it has completely transformed our way of life. Bitcoin has the potential to do the same. Bitcoin's base layer combined with the Lightning network opens up a world of possibilities, including empowering the most vulnerable who are considered too unsavory for the banking system, which easily bends to government pressure. As argued, because Bitcoin exists as a functioning money transfer system outside of our de facto financial system, this is enough of a threat to the existing banking structure. If it succeeds, it can upend the way banks work, including the central banks, which will likely be terrifying but also provide a unique opening for action on climate change once the banks are crippled. At the same time, Bitcoin can also create new problems, especially if it remains popular only among right-wing libertarians. The main point to remember is that Bitcoin itself is just money, it does not come with a right-wing ideology right out of the box. What happens with Bitcoin will depend entirely on the community. This is why it is imperative that we understand what it is and how to use it.

---

**Bitcoin's environmental impact**

I have alluded to some issues related to the digital currency, but the most important one for the climate change community is that of its environmental impact. There are issues with mining companies and underlying energy sources that drive the high-computation costs. The Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance estimates that today, Bitcoin uses roughly 70 terawatt hours per year or 0.31% of the total global electricity production (although estimates peaked at over 130 terawatt hours during the recent bull run). To put this into scale, Austria and Colombia, with populations in the tens of millions use similar amounts. In comparison, the Center reports that refrigerators in the United States use around 100 terawatt hours per year of electricity and global air conditioning use requires 2199 terawatt hours per year of electricity. Cement, a problematic source of CO2 emissions, requires 384 terawatt hours. 

In some cases, Bitcoin mining companies claim to rely on excess electricity in the system to run their hardware. This suggests that mining could be a buyer of last resort, but it is difficult to know how many miners operate this way. It is true that not all Bitcoin mining is renewable energy derived, but Bitcoin is not an entrenched institution, it is malleable. Miners will move to wherever energy costs are cheapest and with the right incentives and external pressures, it is not hard to see mining being fully renewable in a very short period of time. As it stands, the Bitcoin Mining Council estimated in June 2021 that around 56% of mining is based on renewables. A lower bound from a 2018 study puts it around 28%. For perspective, roughly two-thirds of California's energy production is renewable and in Georgia it is 9%. Further, there exists historical precedent from a different energy intensive technology sector from which Bitcoin miners can learn from: data centers.
In 2010, data centers faced criticism for its rightly concerning, fossil fuel-based energy consumption. Did data centers ignore the pressure? No, the data center industry is now the largest user of renewable energy on Earth. Due to pressure from Greenpeace and other environmentalists, companies who relied on the industry, like Google, Facebook and Microsoft, compelled data centers to shift. To quote some statistics from Data Center Frontier, "Electricity usage by global data centers grew just 6 percent from 2010–18…while the number of physical servers rose 30% and compute instances rose by 550 percent. This marked a complete reversal from the 90 percent growth in data center energy from 2000–2005." In other words, the more we understand the operations of Bitcoin, the better we can situate ourselves to put pressure on Bitcoin miners and electricity providers to switch to renewables.

In a 2017 study, data centers - the infrastructure backbone for our Internet-based data sharing needs - were found to use 416 terawatt hours per year or approximately 3% of the total global electricity production. The Cambridge Center reports 200 terawatt hours for data centers based on a different study, so the estimates do vary. Using the Cambridge numbers for data centers, data centers have a lower bound of around 1.5% of global electricity production. This means that data centers alone use roughly 40-percent more energy than the United Kingdom. This is 1.2-2.7% more than the Bitcoin mining network uses (~0.31%). This means that Bitcoin's energy use is within and below the industry standard for computational purposes. If Bitcoin is truly the resilient and adaptive disruptive technology that its proponents claim it to be, then there is no reason to believe that Bitcoin will not follow the data centers' path toward renewable energy reliance. Plus, with continued pressure from climate-concerned members of the community, the shift to renewable energy will be difficult to escape. In fact, since Elon Musk declared that Tesla would no longer accept Bitcoin until it adopted a renewable energy standard, there has been intense discussion around alternative approaches and solutions within the Bitcoin developer mailing list.

Finally, there are a number of additional possibilities for improving energy efficiency in Bitcoin without compromising the proof-of-work algorithm, although within a transition from fossil fuels framework, these would be temporary. A few examples are mining stranded energy, or mining from flared methane. The wasted energy from flaring alone would power almost 10 times the amount of miners currently online.

There is an additional environmental concern, and that is the built-in obsolescence of Application Specific Integrated Chip miners (ASICs). Like a lot of technology devices that we use, devices are built to be thrown away within a few years of use. For example, consumers are incentivized to upgrade their smart phones every two years and ASICs has a similar lifespan. ASICs are designed to do only one task and to do it well. Once they burn out or become outdated due to faster chips on the market, they will be thrown away. Some miners are sold for scrap metal, but I do not doubt that most end up in a landfill. ASICs are not the only device that contributes to e-waste. The EPA estimates that in 2009, US consumers and businesses produced 2.37 million tons of e-waste. Only 25 percent was collected for recycling and the rest went to landfills. We, humans, are wasteful. The EPA reported that if we recycled 1 million cell phones, we could recover more than 35,00 pounds of copper, 33 pounds of palladium, 772 pounds of silver, and 75 pounds of gold. Given the design of ASICs, which are metal boxes filled with 3–4 large circuit boards and two or so plastic fans, there is so much potential for metal recovery and reuse. ASICs do not need to contribute to landfills and environmental pollution.

There have been some questionable claims thrown at Bitcoin over the e-waste that mining causes. Alex de Vries, found of Digiconomist published data based on back-of-the-envelope calculations that claimed that Bitcoin miners were major e-wasters. For now, we will assume his assumptions to be true. Based on his calculations, he concludes that Bitcoin's e-waste generation is 6.37 kilotons per year, roughly half of the waste generated by Luxembourg. Based on the EPA's 2009 numbers for the United States, this makes up 0.27 percent of American electronic waste (2.37 million tons). De Vries makes a second estimate, which is where he assumes erroneously. First, de Vries does not compare the VISA network's e-waste to city-sized countries. Second, he concludes that for each individual Bitcoin transaction, approximately a little more than 80 grams of e-waste is generated (we assume this is true for now). He then says that this is in comparison to the approximately 45 grams generated per 10,000 VISA transactions. 

However, this argument is incorrect because it ignores transactions generated on the Lightning network. As more users move to Lightning for day-to-day transactions, the number of transactions that happen with just one transaction on the Bitcoin layer become competitive with VISA. VISA can handle 60,000 transactions per second, whereas the Lightning network is capable of millions or billions of transactions per second. Therefore, de Vries' argument breaks, because it shows that Bitcoin is no more wasteful than the existing sector, if anything, it has the potential to be less so. To be clear, this is not to excuse the e-waste problem, but only to put it within perspective. E-waste is a byproduct of a single-use society and not a Bitcoin-only problem. We must transform our society consumption habits if we want to see an end to e-waste.

*Mining Alternative Has Network Security Risk*

Proof-of-stake is a well-known alternative to proof-of-work. Its proponents claim it is less energy consuming and that it works as well as proof-of-work. However, a big concern with proof of stake is that it is based on who has the most money staked in the network. Therefore, if you are already extraordinarily wealthy, what stops you from becoming the biggest stakeholder in the network? With Bitcoin mining, you need some technical expertise and a willingness to chase down the cheapest energy sources. 

What we know from financialization is that proof-of-work is not easy money so trying to take over a proof-of-work network like Bitcoin's to attack it would be difficult given finite resources and very expensive. It is much easier for Dimon to stake money than mine. In fact, that is what the ultra-rich do already, they stake their money in shares and other financial assets. Moreover, the benefit of tying proof-of-work to a physical resource, is that it is finite, and electricity must obey the laws of thermodynamics. However, any government could simply inject more liquidity to purchase more of a proof-of-stake currency until it and major banks hold the greatest stake in the network. With majority stake, they can now perform an attack on the network and take it over. In Bitcoin, even if a government owned the majority of coins, it would still not have control of the network, because mining and transaction verification are external to the number of coins owned.
Bitcoin mining is without a doubt energy intensive, however, as discussed in this section, it is not an outlier per se when compared to other industries, especially if we believe that Bitcoin and the network provide a certain value to us. E-waste is an issue, but as discussed, mining is not a lone contributor to this problem and accounts for a small percentage of overall annual e-waste production. Moreover, solutions already exist, such as recycling, which would reduce mining metals and be overall a positive for the environment. In the end, so long as we believe Bitcoin provides value, as I have tried to argue, then focused external and internal pressures, through grassroots campaigns and community discussion and innovation are worth our effort in the goal of keeping global temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

---

**For a habitable future, we must stop financialization**

The end goal here is not to push a libertarian or Austrian economic wet dream of a Bitcoin reserve currency future, but to disrupt the financial system through Bitcoin in order to create a window of opportunity to transform the financial system to meet the needs of a climate change world. Bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency that is in a position to be this threat. Unlike the alternative cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin does not belong to any one organization and despite the benefits of some of these alternatives with respect to energy efficiency, the other options like Cardano, Algorand, and Hedera Hashgraph (to name a few) are vying for a spot to be the backbone for future central bank digital coins. These organizations choose to work within the financial system as it exists today where elites control the central banks in order to save each other from disaster when they play a too risky game and lose. Therefore, they cannot be trusted to be disruptive nor transformative in the way that we desire.

In June of this year, El Salvador became the first country to make Bitcoin a legal tender. No other cryptocurrency has achieved this status. Consider the shift in El Salvadoran monetary policy along with whatever very valid controversy and concerns you may have about the adoption but realize that El Salvador's adoption of Bitcoin is also an attack on neoliberalism, financialization and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF exported, worldwide, policies that led to the systematic transfer of power from the public to private sectors, imposed austerity measures in exchange for loans, and caused the greatest economic downturn in Latin America during the 1980s. The IMF now admits its actions increased inequality and failed to create economic growth. Unsurprisingly, the IMF did not approve of El Salvador's recent Bitcoin adoption. The response from the global banking system already indicates that the thesis that Bitcoin is a threat is true. If we can cripple the banking system, we can at least temporarily put an end to financialization, and use this opening to apply economic solutions, that benefit the climate and people, which were not possible before.

Beyond arguing that Bitcoin is a tool to disrupt the status quo, I want to add a few suggestions regarding how the reader can engage with Bitcoin in order to accelerate its disruption of the financial sector. First, because it is a new technology, you do need to be ready for being a little bit overwhelmed. Spend some time watching videos or reading tutorials on how Bitcoin works. Second, download a wallet, preferably one that has both a regular Bitcoin wallet and a Lightning wallet built in. BlueWallet is one such wallet and I have used it with great success. Most wallets have a built-in way to purchase Bitcoin, so don't bother with exchanges because they will hold your money, you can also look into Bisq, which is a pro-privacy exchange. More importantly, learn how to setup your own node, you can use Umbrel which is plug-and-play, or you can install RaspiBlitz or RaspiBolt, if you are looking for a more hands on experience. Both require the Linux operating system to run. If you want to use Bitcoin to make real world purchases, you can use Bitrefill which runs on the Lightning network. Finally, and most importantly, get involved in the community. Attend meetups, post on Bitcoin related forums, create Bitcoin-related content, and teach others about its' disruptive potential and how to use it.

Bitcoin is a powerful weapon against the financial system, but Bitcoin alone cannot be the solution to everything. We must use every tool available to save ourselves from catastrophic climate change. In my opinion, Bitcoin provides only one solution, the rest is up to us to shape what happens next. As I have tried to argue, Bitcoin has real value and can provide an opening for transformative and systemic change to our financial system. If we do not transform the way our economy works and the power the finance sector has over it and our governments, then there is little hope for keeping the planet from warming beyond habitable levels. Using Bitcoin as a tool for fighting for a habitable future is undoubtedly a kind of Hail Mary pass for the climate, but we are running out of time and mass demonstrations and a failing representative democracy are not doing enough. We have to fight the system on the digital landscape, too. You must decide for yourself which way forward is best, but I know that I will use all available options to reach the goal of keeping this planet from warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius.

---
END

Alan Smithee
Jan 4, 2005


A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...
i aint reading that poo poo lol

Powder keg
Jul 25, 2021

by Fluffdaddy

Alan Smithee posted:

i aint reading that poo poo lol


Read it!

Zlodo
Nov 25, 2006
we also have some dumbass crypto team at our parent company working on stupid concepts to make all the idiots bitcoiners shut up, it doesn't mean anything will come of it

Hammerite
Mar 9, 2007

And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.
Jade Ear Joe

Powder keg posted:

"For twelve years, you have been asking: Who is John Galt? This is John Galt speaking. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are perishing-you who dread knowledge-I am the man who will now tell you." The chief engineer was the only one able to move; he ran to a television set and struggled frantically with its dials. But the screen remained empty; the speaker had not chosen to be seen. Only his voice filled the airways of the country-of the world, thought the chief engineer-sounding as if he were speaking here, in this room, not to a group, but to one man; it was not the tone of addressing a meeting, but the tone of addressing a mind.

"You have heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis. You have said it yourself, half in fear, half in hope that the words had no meaning. You have cried that man's sins are destroying the world and you have cursed human nature for its unwillingness to practice the virtues you demanded. Since virtue, to you, consists of sacrifice, you have demanded more sacrifices at every successive disaster. In the name of a return to morality, you have sacrificed all those evils which you held as the cause of your plight. You have sacrificed justice to mercy. You have sacrificed independence to unity. You have sacrificed reason to faith. You have sacrificed wealth to need. You have sacrificed self-esteem to self-denial. You have sacrificed happiness to duty.

"You have destroyed all that which you held to be evil and achieved all that which you held to be good. Why, then, do you shrink in horror from the sight of the world around you? That world is not the product of your sins, it is the product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I-I am the man who has granted you your wish.

"Your ideal had an implacable enemy, which your code of morality was designed to destroy. I have withdrawn that enemy. I have taken it out of your way and out of your reach. I have removed the source of all those evils you were sacrificing one by one. I have ended your battle. I have stopped your motor. I have deprived your world of man's mind.

"Men do not live by the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those who do. The mind is impotent, you say? I have withdrawn those whose mind isn't. There are values higher than the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those for whom there aren't.

"While you were dragging to your sacrificial altars the men of justice, of independence, of reason, of wealth, of self-esteem-I beat you to it, I reached them first. I told them the nature of the game you were playing and the nature of that moral code of yours, which they had been too innocently generous to grasp. I showed them the way to live by another morality-mine. It is mine that they chose to follow.

"All the men who have vanished, the men you hated, yet dreaded to lose, it is I who have taken them away from you. Do not attempt to find us. We do not choose to be found. Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don't. Do not beg us to return. We are on strike, we, the men of the mind.

"We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one's happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt.

"There is a difference between our strike and all those you've practiced for centuries: our strike consists, not of making demands, but of granting them. We are evil, according to your morality. We have chosen not to harm you any longer. We are useless, according to your economics. We have chosen not to exploit you any longer. We are dangerous and to be shackled, according to your politics. We have chosen not to endanger you, nor to wear the shackles any longer. We are only an illusion, according to your philosophy. We have chosen not to blind you any longer and have left you free to face reality-the reality you wanted, the world as you see it now, a world without mind.

"We have granted you everything you demanded of us, we who had always been the givers, but have only now understood it. We have no demands to present to you, no terms to bargain about, no compromise to reach. You have nothing to offer us. We do not need you.

"Are you now crying: No, this was not what you wanted? A mindless world of ruins was not your goal? You did not want us to leave you? You moral cannibals, I know that you've always known what it was that you wanted. But your game is up, because now we know it, too.

"Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom-while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?-by what standard?

"You wanted to know John Galt's identity. I am the man who has asked that question.

"Yes, this is an age of moral crisis. Yes, you are bearing punishment for your evil. But it is not man who is now on trial and it is not human nature that will take the blame. It is your moral code that's through, this time. Your moral code has reached its climax, the blind alley at the end of its course. And if you wish to go on living, what you now need is not to return to morality-you who have never known any-but to discover it.

"You have heard no concepts of morality but the mystical or the social. You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim, the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve God's purpose or your neighbor's welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next door-but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against you, not to further your life, but to drain it.

"For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors-between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it.

"Both sides agreed that morality demands the surrender of your self-interest and of your mind, that the moral and the practical are opposites, that morality is not the province of reason, but the province of faith and force. Both sides agreed that no rational morality is possible, that there is no right or wrong in reason-that in reason there's no reason to be moral.

"Whatever else they fought about, it was against man's mind that all your moralists have stood united. It was man's mind that all their schemes and systems were intended to despoil and destroy. Now choose to perish or to learn that the anti-mind is the anti-life.

"Man's mind is his basic tool of survival. Life is given to him, survival is not. His body is given to him, its sustenance is not. His mind is given to him, its content is not. To remain alive, he must act, and before he can act he must know the nature and purpose of his action. He cannot obtain his food without a knowledge of food and of the way to obtain it. He cannot dig a ditch-or build a cyclotron-without a knowledge of his aim and of the means to achieve it. To remain alive, he must think.

"But to think is an act of choice. The key to what you so recklessly call 'human nature,' the open secret you live with, yet dread to name, is the fact that man is a being of volitional consciousness. Reason does not work automatically; thinking is not a mechanical process; the connections of logic are not made by instinct. The function of your stomach, lungs or heart is automatic; the function of your mind is not. In any hour and issue of your life, you are free to think or to evade that effort. But you are not free to escape from your nature, from the fact that reason is your means of survival-so that for you, who are a human being, the question 'to be or not to be' is the question 'to' think or not to think.'

"A being of volitional consciousness has no automatic course of behavior. He needs a code of values to guide his actions. 'Value' is that which one acts to gain and keep, 'virtue' is the action by which one gains and keeps it. 'Value' presupposes an answer to the question: of value to whom and for what? 'Value' presupposes a standard, a purpose and the necessity of action in the face of an alternative. Where there are no alternatives, no values are possible.

"There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence-and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not; it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible, it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and-self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it does; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of 'Life' that makes the concept of 'Value' possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.

"A plant must feed itself in order to live; the sunlight, the water, the chemicals it needs are the values its nature has set it to pursue; its life is the standard of value directing its actions. But a plant has no choice of action; there are alternatives in the conditions it encounters, but there is no alternative in its function: it acts automatically to further its life, it cannot act for its own destruction.

"An animal is equipped for sustaining its life; its senses provide it with an automatic code of action, an automatic knowledge of what is good for it or evil. It has no power to extend its knowledge or to evade it. In conditions where its knowledge proves inadequate, it dies. But so long as it lives, it acts on its knowledge, with automatic safety and no power of choice, it is unable to ignore its own good, unable to decide to choose the evil and act as its own destroyer.

"Man has no automatic code of survival. His particular distinction from all other living species is the necessity to act in the face of alternatives by means of volitional choice. He has no automatic knowledge of what is good for him or evil, what values his life depends on, what course of action it requires. Are you prattling about an instinct of self-preservation? An instinct of self-preservation is precisely what man does not possess. An 'instinct' is an unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct. A desire to live does not give you the knowledge required for living. And even man's desire to live is not automatic: your secret evil today is that that is the desire you do not hold. Your fear of death is not a love of life and will not give you the knowledge needed to keep it. Man must obtain his knowledge and choose his actions by a process of thinking, which nature will not force him t9 perform. Man has the power to act as his own destroyer-and that is the way he has acted through most of his history.

"A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and to destroy his mind.

"Man has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of choice-and the alternative his nature offers him is: rational being or suicidal animal. Man has to be man-by choice; he has to hold his life as a value-by choice: he has to learn to sustain it-by choice; he has to discover the values it requires and practice his virtues-by choice.

"A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.

"Whoever you are, you who are hearing me now, I am speaking to whatever living remnant is left uncorrupted within you, to the remnant of the human, to your mind, and I say: There is a morality of reason, a morality proper to man, and Man's Life is its standard of value.

"All that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; all that which destroys it is the evil.

"Man's life, as required by his nature, is not the life of a mindless brute, of a looting thug or a mooching mystic, but the life of a thinking being-not life by means of force or fraud, but life by means of achievement-not survival at any price, since there's only one price that pays for man's survival: reason.

"Man's life is the standard of morality, but your own life is its purpose. If existence on earth is your goal, you must choose your actions and values by the standard of that which is proper to man-for the purpose of preserving, fulfilling and enjoying the irreplaceable value which is your life.

"Since life requires a specific course of action, any other course will destroy it. A being who does not hold his own life as the motive and goal of his actions, is acting on the motive and standard of death. Such a being is a metaphysical monstrosity, struggling to oppose, negate and contradict the fact of his own existence, running blindly amuck on a trail of destruction, capable of nothing but pain.

"Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death. Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one's values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the renunciation of your happiness-to value the failure of your values-is an insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man-every man-is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.

"But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive in any random manner, but will perish unless he lives as his nature requires, so he is free to seek his happiness in any mindless fraud, but the torture of frustration is all he will find, unless he seeks the happiness proper to man. The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.

"Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior. They, who pose as scientists and claim that man is only an animal, do not grant him inclusion in the law of existence they have granted to the lowest of insects. They recognize that every living species has a way of survival demanded by its nature, they do not claim that a fish can live out of water or that a dog can live without its sense of smell-but man, they claim, the most complex of beings, man can survive in any way whatever, man has no identity, no nature, and there's no practical reason why he cannot live with his means of survival destroyed, with his mind throttled and placed at the disposal of any orders they might care to issue.

"Sweep aside those hatred-eaten mystics, who pose as friends of humanity and preach that the highest virtue man can practice is to hold his own life as of no value. Do they tell you that the purpose of morality is to curb man's instinct of self-preservation? It is for the purpose of self-preservation that man needs a code of morality. The only man who desires to be moral is the man who desires to live.

"No, you do not have to live; it is your basic act of choice; but if you choose to live,. you must live as a man-by the work and the judgment of your mind.

"No, you do not have to live as a man; it is an act of moral choice. But you cannot live as anything else-and the alternative is that state of living death which you now see within you and around you, the state of a thing unfit for existence, no longer human and less than animal, a thing that knows nothing but pain and drags itself through its span of years in the agony of unthinking self-destruction.

"No, you do not have to think; it is an act of moral choice. But someone had to think to keep you alive; if you choose to default, you default on existence and you pass the deficit to some moral man, expecting him to sacrifice his good for the sake of letting you survive by your evil.

"No, you do not have to be a man; but today those who are, are not there any longer. I have removed your means of survival-your victims.

"If you wish to know how I have done it and what I told them to make them quit, you are hearing it now. I told them, in essence, the statement I am making tonight. They were men who had lived by my code, but had not known how great a virtue it represented. I made them see it. I brought them, not a re-evaluation, but only an identification of their values.

"We, the men of the mind, are now on strike against you in the name of a single axiom, which is the root of our moral code, just as the root of yours is the wish to escape it: the axiom that existence exists.

"Existence exists-and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.

"If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not consciousness.

"Whatever the degree of your knowledge, these two-existence and consciousness-are axioms you cannot escape, these two are the irreducible primaries implied in any action you undertake, in any part of your knowledge and in its sum, from the first ray of light you perceive at the start of your life to the widest erudition you might acquire at its end. Whether you know the shape of a pebble or the structure of a solar system, the axioms remain the same: that it exists and that you know it.

"To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was-no matter what his errors-the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.

"Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute or an action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

"Are you seeking to know what is wrong with the world? All the disasters that have wrecked your world, came from your leaders' attempt to evade the fact that A is A. All the secret evil you dread to face within you and all the pain you have ever endured, came from your own attempt to evade the fact that A is A. The purpose of those who taught you to evade it, was to make you forget that Man is Man.

"Man cannot survive except by gaining knowledge, and reason is his only means to gain it. Reason is the faculty that perceives, identifies and integrates the material provided by his senses. The task of his senses is to give him the evidence of existence, but the task of identifying it belongs to his reason, his senses tell him only that something is, but what it is must be learned by his mind.

"All thinking is a process of identification and integration. Man perceives a blob of color; by integrating the evidence of his sight and his touch, he learns to identify it as a solid object; he learns to identify the object as a table; he learns that the table is made of wood; he learns that the wood consists of cells, that the cells consist of molecules, that the molecules consist of atoms. All through this process, the work of his mind consists of answers to a single question: What is it? His means to establish the truth of his answers is logic, and logic rests on the axiom that existence exists. Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. An atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one's thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one's mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality.

"Reality is that which exists; the unreal does not exist; the unreal is merely that negation of existence which is the content of a human consciousness when it attempts to abandon reason. Truth is the recognition of reality; reason, man's only means of knowledge, is his only standard of truth.

"The most depraved sentence you can now utter is to ask: Whose reason? The answer is: Yours. No matter how vast your knowledge or how modest, it is your own mind that has to acquire it. It is only with your own knowledge that you can deal. It is only your own knowledge that you can claim to possess or ask others to consider. Your mind is your only judge of truth-and if others dissent from your verdict, reality is the court of final appeal. Nothing but a man's mind can perform that complex, delicate, crucial process of identification which is thinking. Nothing can direct the process but his own judgment. Nothing can direct his judgment but his moral integrity.

"You who speak of a 'moral instinct' as if it were some separate endowment opposed to reason-man's reason is his moral faculty. A process of reason is a process of constant choice in answer to the question: True or False?-Right or Wrong? Is a seed to be planted in soil in order to grow-right or wrong? Is a man's wound to be disinfected in order to save his life-right or wrong? Does the nature of atmospheric electricity permit it to be converted into kinetic power-right or wrong? It is the answers to such questions that gave you everything you have-and the answers came from a man's mind, a mind of intransigent devotion to that which is right.

"A rational process is a moral process. You may make an error at any step of it, with nothing to protect you but your own severity, or you may try to cheat, to fake the evidence and evade the effort of the quest-but if devotion to truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.

"That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call 'free will' is your mind's freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom, the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and your character.

"Thinking is man's only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source of all his evils, is that nameless act which all of you practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blanking out, the willful suspension of one's consciousness, the refusal to think-not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of unfocusing your mind and inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of judgment-on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you refuse to identify it, that A will not be A so long as you do not pronounce the verdict 'It is.' Non-thinking is an act of annihilation, a wish to negate existence, an attempt to wipe out reality. But existence exists; reality is not to be wiped out, it will merely wipe out the wiper. By refusing to say 'It is,' you are refusing to say 'I am.' By suspending your judgment, you are negating your person. When a man declares: 'Who am I to know?'-he is declaring: 'Who am I to live?'

"This, in every hour and every issue, is your basic moral choice: thinking or non-thinking, existence or non-existence, A or non-A, entity or zero.

"To the extent to which a man is rational, life is the premise directing his actions. To the extent to which he is irrational, the premise directing his actions is death.

"You who prattle that morality is social and that man would need no morality on a desert island-it is on a desert island that he would need it most. Let him try to claim, when there are no victims to pay for it, that a rock is a house, that sand is clothing, that food will drop into his mouth without cause or effort, that he will collect a harvest tomorrow by devouring his stock seed today-and reality will wipe him out, as he deserves; reality will show him that life is a value to be bought and that thinking is the only coin noble enough to buy it.

"If I were to speak your kind of language, I would say that man's only moral commandment is: Thou shalt think. But a 'moral commandment' is a contradiction in terms. The moral is the chosen, not the forced; the understood, not the obeyed. The moral is the rational, and reason accepts no commandments.

"My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom: existence exists-and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from these. To live, man must hold three things as the supreme and ruling values of his life: Reason-Purpose-Self-esteem. Reason, as his only tool of knowledge-Purpose, as his choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed to achieve-Self-esteem, as his inviolate certainty that his mind is competent to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: is worthy of living. These three values imply and require all of man's virtues, and all his virtues pertain to the relation of existence and consciousness: rationality, independence, integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness, pride.

"Rationality is the recognition of the fact that existence exists, that nothing can alter the truth and nothing can take precedence over that act of perceiving it, which is thinking-that the mind is one's only judge of values and one's only guide of action-that reason is an absolute that permits no compromise-that a concession to the irrational invalidates one's consciousness and turns it from the task of perceiving to the task of faking reality-that the alleged short-cut to knowledge, which is faith, is only a short-circuit destroying the mind-that the acceptance of a mystical invention is a wish for the annihilation of existence and, properly, annihilates one's consciousness.

"Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it-that no substitute can do your thinking, as no pinch-hitter can live your life-that the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.

"Integrity is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake your consciousness, just as honesty is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake existence-that man is an indivisible entity, an integrated unit of two attributes: of matter and consciousness, and that he may permit no breach between body and mind, between action and thought, between his life and his convictions-that, like a judge impervious to public opinion, he may not sacrifice his convictions to the wishes of others, be it the whole of mankind shouting pleas or threats against him-that courage and confidence are practical necessities, that courage is the practical form of being true to existence, of being true to one's own consciousness.

"Honesty is the recognition of the fact that the unreal is unreal and can have no value, that neither love nor fame nor cash is a value if obtained by fraud-that an attempt to gain a value by deceiving the mind of others is an act of raising your victims to a position higher than reality, where you become a pawn of their blindness, a slave of their non-thinking and their evasions, while their intelligence, their rationality, their perceptiveness become the enemies you have to dread and flee-that you do not care to live as a dependent, least of all a dependent on the stupidity of others, or as a fool whose source of values is the fools he succeeds in fooling-that honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others.

"Justice is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake the character of men as you cannot fake the character of nature, that you must judge all men as conscientiously as you judge inanimate objects, with the same respect for truth, with the same incorruptible vision, by as pure and as rational a process of identification-that every man must be judged for what he is and treated accordingly, that just as you do not pay a higher price for a rusty chunk of scrap than for a piece of shining metal, so you do not value a totter above a hero-that your moral appraisal is the coin paying men for their virtues or vices, and this payment demands of you as scrupulous an honor as you bring to financial transactions-that to withhold your contempt from men's vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement-that to place any other concern higher than justice is to devaluate your moral currency and defraud the good in favor of the evil, since only the good can lose by a default of justice and only the evil can profit-and that the bottom of the pit at the end of that road, the act of moral bankruptcy, is to punish men for their virtues and reward them for their vices, that that is the collapse to full depravity, the Black Mass of the worship of death, the dedication of your consciousness to the destruction of existence.

"Productiveness is your acceptance of morality, your recognition of the fact that you choose to live-that productive work is the process by which man's consciousness controls his existence, a constant process of acquiring knowledge and shaping matter to fit one's purpose, of translating an idea into physical form, of remaking the earth in the image of one's values-that all work is creative work if done by a thinking mind, and no work is creative if done by a blank who repeats in uncritical stupor a routine he has learned from others- that your work is yours to choose, and the choice is as wide as your mind, that nothing more is possible to you and nothing less is human-that to cheat your way into a job bigger than your mind can handle is to become a fear-corroded ape on borrowed motions and borrowed time, and to settle down into a job that requires less than your mind's full capacity is to cut your motor and sentence yourself to another kind of motion: decay-that your work is the process of achieving your values, and to lose your ambition for values is to lose your ambition to live-that your body is a machine, but your mind is its driver, and you must drive as far as your mind will take you, with achievement as the goal of your road-that the man who has no purpose is a machine that coasts downhill at the mercy of any boulder to crash in the first chance ditch, that the man who stifles his mind is a stalled machine slowly going to rust, that the man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to the scrap heap, and the man who makes another man his goal is a hitchhiker no driver should ever pick up-that your work is the purpose of your life, and you must speed past any killer who assumes the right to stop you, that any value you might find outside your work, any other loyalty or love, can be only travelers you choose to share your journey and must be travelers going on their own power in the same direction.

"Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own highest value and, like all of man's values, it has to be earned-that of any achievements open to you, the one that makes all others possible is the creation of your own character-that your character, your actions, your desires, your emotions are the products of the premises held by your mind-that as man must produce the physical values he needs to sustain his life, so he must acquire the values of character that make his life worth sustaining-that as man is a being of self-made wealth, so he is a being of self-made soul-that to live requires a sense of self-value, but man, who has no automatic values, has no automatic sense of self-esteem and must earn it by shaping his soul in the image of his moral ideal, in the image of Man, the rational being he is born able to create, but must create by choice-that the first precondition of self-esteem is that radiant selfishness of soul which desires the best in all things, in values of matter and spirit, a soul that seeks above all else to achieve its own moral perfection, valuing nothing higher than itself-and that the proof of an achieved self-esteem is your soul's shudder of contempt and rebellion against the role of a sacrificial animal, against the vile impertinence of any creed that proposes to immolate the irreplaceable value which is your consciousness and the incomparable glory which is your existence to the blind evasions and the stagnant decay of others.

"Are you beginning to see who is John Galt? I am the man who has earned the thing you did not fight for, the thing you have renounced, betrayed, corrupted, yet were unable fully to destroy and are now hiding as your guilty secret, spending your life in apologies to every professional cannibal, lest it be discovered that somewhere within you, you still long to say what I am now saying to the hearing of the whole of mankind: I am proud of my own value and of the fact that I wish to live.

"This wish-which you share, yet submerge as an evil-is the only remnant of the good within you, but it is a wish one must learn to deserve. His own happiness is man's only moral purpose, but only his own virtue can achieve it. Virtue is not an end in itself. Virtue is not its own reward or sacrificial fodder for the reward of evil. Life is the reward of virtue-and happiness is the goal and the reward of life.

"Just as your body has two fundamental sensations, pleasure and pain, as signs of its welfare or injury, as a barometer of its basic alternative, life or death, so your consciousness has two fundamental emotions, joy and suffering, in answer to the same alternative. Your emotions are estimates of that which furthers your life or threatens it, lightning calculators giving you a sum of your profit or loss. You have no choice about your capacity to feel that something is good for you or evil, but what you will consider good or evil, what will give you joy or pain, what you will love or hate, desire or fear, depends on your standard of value. Emotions are inherent in your nature, but their content is dictated by your mind. Your emotional capacity is an empty motor, and your values are the fuel with which your mind fills it. If you choose a mix of contradictions, it will clog your motor, corrode your transmission and wreck you on your first attempt to move with a machine which you, the driver, have corrupted.

"If you hold the irrational as your standard of value and the impossible as your concept of the good, if you long for rewards you have not earned, for a fortune, or a love you don't deserve, for a loophole in the law of causality, for an A that becomes non-A at your whim, if you desire the opposite of existence-you will reach it. Do not cry, when you reach it, that life is frustration and that happiness is impossible to man; check your fuel: it brought you where you wanted to go.

"Happiness is not to be achieved at the command of emotional whims. Happiness is not the satisfaction of whatever irrational wishes you might blindly attempt to indulge. Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joy-a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy of escaping from your mind, but of using your mind's fullest power, not the joy of faking reality, but of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a drunkard, but of a producer. Happiness is possible only to a rational man, the man who desires nothing but rational goals, seeks nothing but rational values and finds his joy in nothing but rational actions.

"Just as I support my life, neither by robbery nor alms, but by my own effort, so I do not seek to derive my happiness from the injury or the favor of others, but earn it by my own achievement. Just as I do not consider the pleasure of others as the goal of my life, so I do not consider my pleasure as the goal of the lives of others. Just as there are no contradictions in my values and no conflicts among my desires-so there are no victims and no conflicts of interest among rational men, men who do not desire the unearned and do not view one another with a cannibal's lust, men who neither make sacrifice nor accept them.

"The symbol of all relationships among such men, the moral symbol of respect for human beings, is the trader. We, who live by values, not by loot, are traders, both in matter and in spirit. A trader is a man who earns what he gets and does not give or take the undeserved. A trader does not ask to be paid for his failures, nor does he ask to be loved for his flaws. A trader does not squander his body as fodder or his soul as alms. Just as he does not give his work except in trade for material values, so he does not give the values of his spirit-his love, his friendship, his esteem-except in payment and in trade for human virtues, in payment for his own selfish pleasure, which he receives from men he can respect. The mystic parasites who have, throughout the ages, reviled the traders and held them in contempt, while honoring the beggars and the looters, have known the secret motive of their sneers: a trader is the entity they dread-a man of justice.

"Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None-except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality. I deal with men as my nature and their demands: by means of reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don't, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no benefits to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit. Seraph is a nonce lol

"Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate-do you hear me? no man may start-the use of physical force against others.

"To interpose the threat of physical destruction between a man and his perception of reality, is to negate and paralyze his means of survival; to force-him to act against his own judgment, is like forcing him to act against his own sight. Whoever, to whatever purpose or extent, initiates the use of force, is a killer acting on the premise of death in a manner wider than murder: the premise of destroying man's capacity to live.

"Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer claim the sanction of reason-as no advocate of contradictions can claim it. There can be no 'right' to destroy the source of rights, the only means of judging right and wrong: the mind.

"To force a man to drop his own mind and to accept your will as a substitute, with a gun in place of a syllogism, with terror in place of proof, and death as the final argument-is to attempt to exist in defiance of reality. Reality demands of man that he act for his own rational interest; your gun demands of him that he act against it. Reality threatens man with death if he does not act on his rational judgment: you threaten him with death if he does. You place him into a world where the price of his life is the surrender of all the virtues required by life-and death by a process of gradual destruction is all that you and your system will achieve, when death is made to be the ruling power, the winning argument in a society of men.

"Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: 'Your money or your life,' or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: 'Your children's education or your life,' the meaning of that ultimatum is: 'Your mind or your life'-and neither is possible to man without the other.

"If there are degrees of evil, it is hard to say who is the more contemptible: the brute who assumes the right to force the mind of others or the moral degenerate who grants to others the right to force his mind. That is the moral absolute one does not leave open to debate. I do not grant the terms of reason to men who propose to deprive me of reason. I do not enter discussions with neighbors who think they can forbid me to think. I do not place my moral sanction upon a murderer's wish to kill me. When a man attempts to deal with me by force, I answer him-by force.

"It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had the right to choose: his own. He uses force to seize a value; I use it only to destroy destruction. A holdup man seeks to gain wealth by killing me; I do not grow richer by killing a holdup man. I seek no values by means of evil, nor do I surrender my values to evil.

"In the name of all the producers who had kept you alive and received your death ultimatums in payment, I now answer you with a single ultimatum of our own: Our work or your guns. You can choose either; you can't have both. We do not initiate the use of force against others or submit to force at their hands. If you desire ever again to live in an industrial society, it Will be on our moral terms. Our terms and our motive power are the antithesis of yours. You have been using fear as your weapon and have been bringing death to man as his punishment for rejecting your morality. We offer him life as his reward for accepting ours.

"You who are worshippers of the zero-you have never discovered that achieving life is not the equivalent of avoiding death. Joy is not 'the absence of pain,' intelligence is not 'the absence of stupidity,' light is not 'the absence of darkness,' an entity is not 'the absence of a nonentity.' Building is not done by abstaining from demolition; centuries of sitting and waiting in such abstinence will not raise one single girder for you to abstain from demolishing-and now you can no longer say to me, the builder: 'Produce, and feed us in exchange for our not destroying your production.' I am answering in the name of all your victims: Perish with and in your own void. Existence is not a negation of negatives. Evil, not value, is an absence and a negation, evil is impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from us. Perish, because we have learned that a zero cannot hold a mortgage over life.

"You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.

"You, who have lost the concept of the difference, you who claim that fear and joy are incentives of equal power-and secretly add that fear is the more 'practical'-you do not wish to live, and only fear of death still holds you to the existence you have damned. You dart in panic through the trap of your days, looking for the exit you have closed, running from a pursuer you dare not name to a terror you dare not acknowledge, and the greater your terror the greater your dread of the only act that could save you: thinking. The purpose of your struggle is not to know, not to grasp or name or hear the thing. I shall now state to your hearing: that yours is the Morality of Death.

"Death is the standard of your values, death is your chosen goal, and you have to keep running, since there is no escape from the pursuer who is out to destroy you or from the knowledge that that pursuer is yourself. Stop running, for once-there is no place to run-stand naked, as you dread to stand, but as I see you, and take a look at what you dared to call a moral code.

"Damnation is the start of your morality, destruction is its purpose, means and end. Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the good is that which he is not.

"It does not matter who then becomes the profiteer on his renounced glory and tormented soul, a mystic God with some incomprehensible design or any passer-by whose rotting sores are held as some inexplicable claim upon him-it does not matter, the good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to any stray collector of unintelligible debts, his only concept of a value is a zero: the good is that which is non-man.

"The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

"A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man's sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man's nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.

"Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a 'tendency' to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free.

"What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge-he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil-he became a mortal being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor-he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire-he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment.

Yes

Shame Boy
Mar 2, 2010

For twelve years you have been asking, Who am I? I'm a computer nerd, like some of you...

Alan Smithee
Jan 4, 2005


A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...
....I found myself stuck in Brazil with no way of....

LordSaturn
Aug 12, 2007

sadly unfunny

Alan Smithee posted:

....I found myself stuck in the bitcoin thread with no way of....

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zlodo
Nov 25, 2006
just skimmed this to try to find a mind bogglingly stupid morsel, it wasn't long

galaxy brain bitcoin dude posted:

E-waste is an issue, but as discussed, mining is not a lone contributor to this problem and accounts for a small percentage of overall annual e-waste production. Moreover, solutions already exist, such as recycling, which would reduce mining metals and be overall a positive for the environment.

ah yes, recycling means free resources :thunk:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply