Elizabeth Warren, the Bitcoiner That Doesn’t Know it

1

“Since the early 1970s, adjusted for inflation, wages in America have barley budged. But the cost of housing has gone up nearly two-thirds. The cost of college has nearly tripled and 40% of Americans couldn’t find $400 to cover an emergency.”

So said Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren in her campaign opening speech for the 2020 presidential bid.

“By the time the 2008 global financial crash came around, it only confirmed what millions of Americans already knew: the system was rigged against working people,” she said in an editorial.

“Take on Wall Street so that the big banks can never again threaten the security of our economy,” she said, adding:

“To protect their economic advantages, the rich and powerful have rigged our political system.

They’ve bought off or bullied politicians in both parties to make sure Washington is always on their side. Some of them have even tried to buy their way into public office.

So today, our government works just great for oil companies and defense contractors, great for private prisons, great for Wall Street banks and hedge funds, it’s just not working for anyone else.”

If you didn’t know it was Elizabeth Warren speaking, you’d probably think this was some young millennial mouthing against thin-air fiat inflation while bigging up cryptos and their promise of decreasing the banker’s power by removing them as necessary intermediaries.

Warren, however, for some reason seems to think bitcoin is Wall Street. “I’m worried about consumers getting hurt,” Warren said last year when asked if she was concerned about hundreds of thousands of people signing up to buy bitcoin.

“It’s American families that end up paying the price when any regulator says we’re more interested in Wall Street,” Warren added. “What I think is that we need a Fed that is engaged in watching where risk builds up in the system.”

The close to 70 years old frontrunner for the democratic nomination perhaps can’t be faulted for not quite grasping bitcoin or cryptos in general, but does the left suffer from crypto phobia?

Crypto Bias on the Left?

It is perhaps no surprise that the most outspoken bitcoin basher in congress is a democrat. The left just seems to think cryptos are a libertarian thing or politically charged.

That’s no different than saying electricity has a political preference, or cars somehow lean to the right.

There are cryptos with inflation, without inflation (eventually), pegged to the dollar or other fiat money, acting as just a share, and collectivist like systems such as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs).

Any crypto is in fact a collectivist decision making mechanism that takes power away from bankers and gives it to the people. That pleases the free market right and should please the collectivist left, but it appears not to for the latter.

Socialism or Dictatorship?

Communism flourished in the beginning. In the 50s, 60s, and even in the 70s, economies running on collectives were doing better than free market economies.

That changed when the power hungry, dogma imposing, centralized communist state decided to turn towns and villages into command economies where effectively one individual decided the price of bread.

The decision led to a split within communist ideology. Revisionism, some said. China and Russia fought it out with words. A tiny European nation, Albania, found itself in the midst of it and eventually found itself to be the most isolated country.

That absolute centralization of power and economic activity away from semi-autonomous collectives and into the hands of effectively one man eventually led to a collapse.

Those on the far-left now say communism never collapsed as it was never tried. They say so perhaps rightly. In its foundations, communism is decentralization, worker-owners. In practice, however, communism has always become dictatorial because the state in every communist country has replaced relatively more decentralized corporations or collectives with an absolutely centralized central point.

A generation is now realizing this tendency of the left, a tendency towards authoritarianism, giving the right power across the globe, but is the left hopeless or just completely lost?

The New Marx

Warren plans to introduce “an Ultra-Millionaire Tax on America’s 75,000 richest families to produce trillions that can be used to build an economy that works for everyone.”

She wants workers to “elect at least 40% of the company’s board members to give them a powerful voice… And it means a new era of strong antitrust enforcement.”

At the same time she says “none of the roughly $4 billion so far raised through ICOs had registered properly with the SEC.”

The insight of Karl Marx, and the sole reason why he became an immense force last century, was that labour produces more value than it receives in compensation from the employer.

There’s a lack of negotiating power in that relationship, so the employer can extract more from the worker, and can pocket the difference.

A bit like Jeff Bezos, who spends time writing medium posts rather than paying properly some of his less fortunate workers.

That power disbalance is objectively undeniable, the question is what is the solution. As far as Warren is concerned, the solution is for her personally to decide what should be the price of bread.

Red tape upon red tape because everyone is a massive corporation and basement start-ups where very hardworking men starve night and day to create value do not exist.

The fault with banking, moreover, is lack of regulations. Lack of Warren telling them what to do. Which in some cases is true because banks do have immense power in deciding who they lend to, but the problem is that power itself.

The law prohibits everyone and anyone from creating money. It privileges only the state with the task. Yet the state has abdicated that duty and has, unconstitutionally some say, delegated it to bankers.

Bankers now effectively rule the world for they can create “value” out of purely nothing. Warren’s stated policies aim to maintain that monopoly, under the guise of protecting the people, as she has riled up against people too – and projects too – creating money out of thin air so as to give bankers and employers competition, thus addressing that disbalance in a more decentralized manner.

Ancient Kings and New Age Queens

“Warren’s tour of the world – a Russia that is ‘belligerent and resurgent,’ a China that has ‘weaponized’ everything, nuclear proliferation in North Korea, ‘looming unrest in the western hemisphere’ – seems intent on proving herself neither a dove nor naive. Along the way she wants to ‘face down antidemocratic forces around the world,’ end terrorism and deal with the ‘challenges’ of cyber-attacks.

Dealing with it all, says, requires ‘more than a strong military.’ And so she wants multilateral arms control, more investments in diplomacy, increased foreign aid to advance US interests, strong and large alliances where our partners pay their fair share. Oh and she’s for peace, which she describes as ‘preventing problems from morphing into costly wars’ and ‘not policing the world,’ which somehow she twists to make an innovation after two years of Trump.”

That’s a guest editorial on the Guardian and can be summarized as basically she fancies herself to be queen. She thinks her intellect is so superior that she can just go around and order seven billion people, break up monopolies instead of reforming the laws that created such monopolies in the first place, echo Trump yet somehow claim she is against Trump, and basically refrain from offering any solution while saying all the right things. No wonder Trump would love to run against her:

The left has a role to play, but not this left. They have lost their way. An idea once based on decentralization, the many dispersed workers being best placed to decide, has now morphed into a monstrosity where one woman or man knows what is best for billions.

How is that different from the far more dispersed corporate CEOs knowing what’s best? Where are the real socialist policies? Where is the real empowerment of workers?

Dead, as dead as a left that fancies itself to be king despite the atrocities caused in the last century. A left that still thinks they can decide the price of bread. A left that now dares to offer this millennial generation not one option in what should be a fireworks 2020 campaign.

Because Trump is not perfect. He has done some good things, especially in the war and peace matter, but there should be someone to chide him about this wall which would be a terrible symbol. And not in softy feely way, but heads on, with an intellectual foundation, with a workable solution.

This educated generation won’t stand for platitudes any longer. Nor silly left-right boxes. Nor hypocrisy. Nor empty words, for we have plenty of entertainment options and no stomach for them after Obama’s deception.

Solutions are required and it is about time the left provides them, otherwise they will be out of power for at least a decade.

Copyrights Trustnodes.com

 

1
Comment

100000
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Cynic

Cryptos are based on free market principles and the left hates free market because it leads to disparities in wealth (or power law distribution of wealth). In free market you can do a great amount of work and be poor or work very little and be rich because your payoff is decide by supply and demand and not by “justice” or “fairness”, and the left hates this. The left has always been against free market.