Of course, who can kill something people cling to without providing a pleasant substitute? In the weakness and vapidity of the bitcoiner, he simply says what is convenient and speaks in order to shore up his lack of confidence. Too cowardly to stand naked, alone, himself and his bitcoin. Who other than Beautyon all these years has dared speak the truth, over what was a (psychological) convenience?

And the pathetic shouting of course only served to console, for didn't you know the anti-persuasive effects this had... and hasn't it been long enough? The will to be misunderstood as Max Keiser reflected upon was wise, but isn't the time for that passed?

It was called money so much this was believed. Of course, the bitcoiner is sloppy in his speech and thinking, intransigently refusing to draw distinction between future and present, unfit to rule, one might say, noting the lack of theory of mind for those incapable of understanding much at all of present reality -- ironic, given the bitcoiner does not understand the present, so how could he possibly compel the men of his time?

There is something disgusting in the fixation on having read the Austrian and German economics, but nothing of Austro-German philosophy, which would reveal much that has gone unnoticed by Satoshi's apostles, how many layers removed?

For in reading Luhmann and Nietzsche and more incisively contemplating the nature of reality, the bitcoiner may become capable of understanding things as they are. Linguistically, what is money? Nietzsche considered the formation of language and the calling of things as this and this as seals to bring them under one's dominion, so where does that leave money, this word? What if it were the exercising of power over something else that has been obscured, a sort of secondary layer as paper was pointer to gold?

Money is power for the blind fool who denies the existence of power and thereby would seek to deny all of life itself with utilitarian productivism that devolves into a sort of communism of action styles -- yet he is able to ignore the communist modality by appeal to the supposed opposition of the term capitalism, something none can truly imagine for the bitcoin world is not one anyone knows, nor can honestly claim to know in great detail, beyond the shallow surface. And what if hyperbitcoinization was nothing but a shallow element to something much larger? Then perhaps the bitcoiner might humble himself, but he has adopted the philosophy of the fiat minded by other means, by and large, or has becoming but a hermit, a denial of life itself, an abstention from one's own life! Not to say it is a bad thing. It is marvelous in its own right, but martyrdom it still is.

And what of this notion of power? It is not such an esoteric thing after all. Walk down the wrong alley at night and glance at the face's of the men you walk past. You will notice a peer to peer, decentralized exchange of information pertaining to power, where consensus is usually found quite rapidly. In the encounter of power, all men are quick to understand the difference between actual truth, and their notion of "right" or "wrong" as to what this their property "right."

This power, how does it move? Information. So what do you have? You have secrets. You have context. This notion of "owning property" is a convenient dissimulation, and one which may be remarkably stable, but surely you know God does not guarantee "your" property? When one drops the pathetic pleading of "rights" what is left? Only the information you choose to reveal. By attachment to the notion of "property rights," you have submitted to the frame of power, which lets you enjoy this illusion, and if you appeal to illusions, how could your message ever resonate with anyone? For the money is owned by power and the power is held by networks of humans. The money is not the SQL databases of the Fed or the BIS, in and of itself, and this notion of things in and of themselves assures the confusion will continue.

When will the bitcoiner think in terms of power? Perhaps when he decides to acquire some to complement his capital. Then maybe the world will catch a glimpse of what bitcoin inspires. Until then, enjoy your hippy micropayments and shit-corporations, about which you are by now well aware, nobody cares. The gig is up, for neither do you.

When you realize bitcoin is a modality for power, it becomes clear that it is but a single dimension of power. Will you explore the others? Of course, you already have to some extent, but have you made your implicit understanding explicit, or have you allowed bitcoin to be a substitute for thinking deeply about the nature of life, and if so, has it truly made you rich, or only one dimensionally so?