Why Are Nation-State Agencies Ignoring Bitcoin As It Challenges Dollar Hegemony?

On the surface, Bitcoin seems poised to take over as the world reserve currency based on the game theory of people converging on the adoption of a single hard and sound currency.

The original cryptocurrency has officially entered into its teenage years following the publication of the white paper on October 31, 2008. Plebs have been stacking bitcoin since the genesis block was mined on January 3, 2009. Both private and public companies have been accumulating it, and even governments have taken the plunge. Looking at the macro picture is certainly exciting from the standpoint of an early adopter.

Every ten minutes, blocks are being added to this decentralized timechain and Bitcoin is working as designed. The task at hand is for Bitcoiners to stay vigilant in order to keep it that way. One strategy for this is to constantly be thinking of attack vectors in all of their forms. To that end, this piece focuses on possible social and governmental sabotage.

El Salvador And Bitcoin Vs. The Globalists

On November 20, 2021, Nayib Bukele, the president of El Salvador, announced plans to create a “Bitcoin City,” funded by bitcoin-backed bonds.

The city would charge 0% income, capital gains, property, payroll and municipal taxes. The only tax levied will be a value-added tax. In addition to all of those 0% taxes, the city plans to have 0% carbon emissions by utilizing the geothermal energy from the nearby Conchagua volcano.

The country is funding this centrally-planned project through bitcoin-backed “Volcano Bonds” spearheaded by Blockstream. Bukele has been praised by the Bitcoin community for adopting bitcoin as legal tender in El Salvador. He has welcomed Bitcoiners with open arms, offering citizenship to people who invest 3 bitcoin in the country and even changed the travel requirements to exclude proof of vaccination and negative COVID-19 test results, which coincidentally went into effect on the same day that the Adopting Bitcoin conference started.

Bukele’s term has not been without criticism. In May, he ousted five Supreme Court justices and the attorney general, purportedly because they ruled that his COVID-19 stay-at-home order was unconstitutional.

In September, Bukele passed laws removing judges who were over 60 years old, effectively firing approximately 30% of the sitting judges. A few days later, Bukele’s courts ruled that presidents could run for consecutive terms, defying El Salvador’s constitution and setting Bukele up for an additional term.

Following this, the National Assembly passed a law allowing for land and estate expropriations (read: seizure) in the name of an ambiguously defined “public interest.” There’s more questionable behavior from Bukele and his cronies, but the theme here is a strong trend of nationalization and squashing opposition that is reminiscent of other authoritarian regimes.

These are not qualities that Bitcoiners laud and we should be wary of this type of statist conduct. Adopting Bitcoin does not preclude governments from being totalitarian empires and we should be aware of the cognitive dissonance that comes with praising a country for adopting a free and open monetary network while also ignoring its obvious tyrannical tendencies.

Source

The announcement of “Bitcoin City” was met with excitement by Bitcoin news outlets and many people on Bitcoin Twitter, though there are some who feel skeptical of this plan, myself included.

I think it’s possible and even likely that Bukele truly “gets it” and wants Bitcoin to succeed. I also find it curious that his strategy to make bitcoin legal tender and facilitate positive tax policy for bitcoin investors in the country is being largely ignored/allowed by the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

Bukele was also recently announced as a speaker at Bitcoin 2022 in Miami, FL. I am especially suspicious because he will be in attendance for the speech in the very country whose power he is directly usurping by abandoning the dollar standard. Notably, the United States has been extremely quiet about El Salvador’s adoption of Bitcoin.

So, what is going on here? Are these world organizations largely ignoring this radical move because El Salvador is deemed too inconsequential of a nation? An executive at the BIS said El Salvador’s adoption of bitcoin as legal tender is an “interesting experiment,” the World Bank denied El Salvador’s request for help adopting bitcoin as legal tender, and now that the country did it regardless, the IMF has issued a gently-worded statement advising against the country using bitcoin as legal tender due to its volatility. Most recently, the chief at the Bank of England called El Salvador’s move to adopt Bitcoin as its currency concerning.

Why are these major globalist organizations being so light-handed in their responses to this overtly subversive move? And who will be the first Bitcoiners to move to Bitcoin City at the base of a volcano?

Source

Where Are The “Economic Hit Men”?

I admit that my worldview is biased toward expecting the United States government to handle this with some sort of renegade, extrajudicial “accident” à la the Bay of Pigs, Gulf of Tonkin, Mossadeq coup, numerous assassinations in Africa, etc. Why are the three-letter agencies in the United States ignoring El Salvador and their adoption of bitcoin as legal tender?

In “Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man,” John Perkins writes about the presidents of Ecuador and Panama, Roldós and Torrijos, respectively, who were assassinated by the CIA for not getting in line with global imperialism.

The book details numerous examples, such as those in which agents of the corporatocracy went into developing countries, projected unrealistic electrical infrastructure growth and sold the locals the necessary facilities to achieve it, putting them in massive debt to the United States so that the countries would be forever subservient to the interests of Washington and Wall Street.

This originated with the Monroe Doctrine, which took manifest destiny a step further in the 1850s by using it to claim that the U.S. had special rights all over the hemisphere, including the right to invade any nation in Central or South America that refused to back U.S. policies. Later, this was invoked to justify intervention in the Dominican Republic, in Venezuela and in Panama in order to develop the Panama Canal. The leaders who had the foresight to see this economic subjugation for what it was and chose not to comply often had coincidental accidents and were replaced by authoritarian dictators.

In his book, Perkins details how the Panama Canal was completed after a coup orchestrated by Theodore Roosevelt, whose troops killed a local militia commander and declared Panama an independent nation where a puppet government was installed and the first Panama Canal Treaty was signed, without Panamanian influence or support.

Panama was then ruled by oligarchic families with ties to Washington and who allied with United States’ interests by supporting the CIA, NSA, big businesses, and anti-communist factions. The result was an opulent, U.S.-controlled Canal zone surrounded by destitute Panamanian slums. The folk hero and politician, Omar Torrijos, negotiated a deal with the Carter administration to repatriate the Panama Canal. This angered the Reagan-Bush administration so much that it sought to assassinate him. Torrijos died in a plane crash during a routine flight which most of the world outside of the United States viewed as a CIA assassination.

This is only one example of United States government intervention in world affairs from the book. Perkins explains how the Great Depression resulted in the New Deal, which further advanced economic regulation and governmental financial manipulation in the country, directly led to the creation of the World Bank, the IMF and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade after WWII.