Skip to main content

Weathering With You: An Agorist Perspective

If someone asked you what your favorite emotion was, how do you think you’d answer? For many people, I suspect they would answer “Happiness”, “Joy'', or some variant of exclusively positive emotion. Someone may think more meticulously and answer with “Contentment”, which while a positive emotion has a lot of nuance attached to it. However my answer to that question is what I feel others would consider more orthodox: Bittersweet. Pleasure accompanied by suffering, not exactly most people’s first pick but from my perspective pain is necessary in order to enjoy the pleasure that life gives you. Perhaps I'm over-romanticizing but there’s something to desire from looking back fondly at times where you were hurting and seeing yourself in a better place in the present. Perhaps you finally have moved on from “The one who got away” and can look back on those times with fondness. Perhaps you are sharing stories of a friend or family member at their funeral and though they may never w

Against the IFP

Centralizing control over a currency’s infrastructure is a seemingly obvious mistake.

One would think any Austro-libertarian worth their salt would be able to see thru such a charade. Yet here we are, again. Face to face with economic illiteracy. Not garden variety lefist economic illiteracy, but one far more stinging and painful - one which comes from within our own community, rather than from without. 

First, Bitcoiners faced the economic illiteracy of maximalism and small blockers. Attempts to masquerade money’s primary function as value storage (Ammous) or rejecting Menger’s Regression Theorem altogether (Szabo) are luckily demonstrably false. Nevertheless, the shock of our fellow Bitcoiners illiteracy was like an unexpected slap in the face. Suddenly, we were forced to confront the fact that the ignorance of our allies in the fight for sound money, had led them astray. Yet, thru BCH we were thankfully able to keep Satoshi’s dream of peer to peer cash intact. 

Well, crypto anarchist, it’s time to turn the other cheek. You're in for another slap. 

Bitcoin ABC has put forward an Infrastructure Funding Plan whereby 8% of Coinbase mining rewards will be automatically diverted into their pockets. It appears they intend on forcing this change down the throat of the p2p cash community come hell or high water. 

Not to worry. Obviously, anybody with half a brain can figure out that allowing ONE development firm to pick and choose which projects to fund is far less efficient than the market-driven, entrepreneurial system of profit & loss. Right? 

I mean, any libertarian who’s familiar with Hayek knows that shifting responsibility for resource allocation from entrepreneurs to a centralized firm, forces reliance on a pretense of knowledge, inevitably bound for failure. And any austro-libertarian vaguely familiar with Mises’ economic calculation problem understands why a market deprived of the appropriate pricing mechanisms can never have an efficient allocation of resources. Indeed, all crypto-anarchists must surely know that the free rider problem is a myth - used only to justify market intervention & the forced subsidization of unsolicited goods & services. Right?

Think again, friends. 

If the seemingly crystal clear economic case isn’t clear enough, consider the historical case. 

There are exactly zero examples in all of human history of a sound currency’s infrastructure being developed by one centralized firm. The mere thought is ludicrous. Gold mints, mines, and banks were owned and operated by independently functioning market actors. The only information they used to coordinate with each other were prices. 

In stark contrast, infrastructure surrounding every fiat currency has been developed exactly as ABC proposes - with one centralized entity entirely determining the route development will take. 

In the case of USD, the Federal Reserve is led by Jerome Powell and decisions regarding future development are made by the FOMC. In our case, ABC is led by Amaury Sechet and decisions regarding future development are made by ‘the council.’ Just as politics determines who’s fit for the FOMC, so too will it determine who's deemed worthy for Sechet’s ‘council.’ Indeed, it already has. 

Who does the IFP benefit? 

On the surface, it may seem as if the IFP is in the interests of a small group of developers, but even this is overstating the case. The death of peer to peer cash & the imposition of peer to ABC to peer cash, means the prolongation of the Federal Reserve’s currency monopoly. In the long run, this doesn’t benefit Sechet, ABC or anyone else for that matter. 

Moreover, Sechet’s preference for the short term gratification of mining rewards over the true prize of central bank disintermediation is indicative of a high time preference. This high time preference is itself brought about by existing central bank policies, and it’s in this roundabout way that the Fed is able to perpetuate it’s cycle of degeneracy and slavery. 

Nor does the IFP benefit agorists. Disrupting the nature of p2p cash to line ABC’s pockets is directly opposed to our mission of providing the public with sound money alternatives to Federal Reserve notes. Peer to peer cash is the tool Satoshi created, & it’s the tool Ross Ulbricht showed us how to use so effectively. 

Peer to ABC to peer cash is great for making ABC boatloads of money, but it's far less useful for counter-economic purposes. 


  1. Where's your bch Dobson address? Would love to support your work.

  2. Absolutely outstanding analysis, thank you!

  3. The miners requested this funding mechanism to make their donations fair (between BCH miners) to remove the "free rider miners" problem that disincentivized the other miner's desire to donate. ABC control over the funding is a problem I think needs to be fixed, but I see no evidence the funds will be used for anything but making BCH greater faster. If the miners want to donate like this to make BCH better, think about who would want to block that strategy of funding BCH developers. Note the anti-BCH troll army of social engineering agents created the anti-ABC and anti-IFP movement to harm BCH. Their arguments are mostly flawed but very well designed to seem true. Many have been fooled into thinking dividing BCH developers and the community is the best way to go here.

    1. No they did not. 0% of miners voted for it in the lead up to 15 May 2020 and 0% are signaling for it now. LITERALLY ZERO.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Truth About Global Warming

Libertarians who deny the existence of global warming run the risk of making us all look like a bunch of illiterate fools. Much like economics, being ignorant of planetology or climate science isn't a crime, but having a "loud and vociferous" opinion on the subject while remaining in a state of ignorance can be a dangerous thing. And frankly, the science behind climate change is elementary. Sunlight enters our atmosphere and warms our planet. Earth then gives off that heat in the form of infrared radiation (this is the same principle behind those cool goggles our collapsitarian friends have). However, and this is a crucial point - the CO₂ molecules in our atmosphere do not allow IR to easily escape back into space. This is known as the greenhouse effect. As the temperature of the planet increases, polar ice caps melt and eventually surface water will begin to evaporate. Since H₂0 also prevents IR from escaping our atmosphere, the additional water vapor only compound

The Counter-Economics of COVID

In March 2020 - some say earlier, but by March 2020 at latest - the banking had sector collapsed. In response, coronavirus was manufactured as a scapegoat to justify the liquidity injection necessary to keep the Federal Reserve’s ponzi scheme alive. The State’s narrative would henceforth be: ‘Since all businesses were shut down, an unprecedented amount of money must be printed and distributed to the public.’ Milton Friedman’s helicopter money had come to fruition. But like a junkie chasing his initial high, the Fed had become immune to the effects of monetary stimulus. Each injection requiring a stronger, more potent dose of cheap & easy money. Less than two years later, and the effects of that stimulus have now waned & the banksters are poised to pull off another heist. As the business cycle continues to ebb and flow until the day of final reckoning, the State can be expected to behave in an increasingly erratic fashion. Like a cornered cat, or a fish out of water, the State

The Trouble With Dave Smith

  On the issues, Dave & most agorists can find agreement 99 out of 100 times, but as libertarians we have a habit, a pastime - a duty even, to seek out & argue over the 1% of things we don’t agree on. In keeping with that tradition friends, I've got to tell you, when it comes to strategy, Dave Smith seriously fumbles the ball. The fundamental issue is that @comicdavesmith is interested in creating libertarians, whereas agorists are interested in creating liberty. Dave has a classic case of @perbylund ’s Savior Complex - the irrational desire of individualists to save the collective whole of society. There are lots of problems with this, but even if creating libertarians is a worthy goal, does that mean the Libertarian Party is the best vehicle to accomplish this task? Has anything the Libertarian Party ever done caused even a slight retreat of statism? Dave rightly points to his own success at spreading the message of liberty. It's true, no one - save Ron Paul or Tom