Bitcoin is a fascinating monetary tool that many believe will help fight the central banking system, corrupt economic planning, and help stop a small group of individuals from controlling the world’s money supply. Often times bitcoin is associated with anarcho-capitalism, free markets, and sometimes the Austrian school of economics. Today we will look at a large group of anarcho-capitalists, ‘gold bugs,’ and well-known economists to see how they feel about the bitcoin revolution.
Also Read: The Age of Disruption: Individual Anarchism Grows Alongside Peer-2-Peer Devices
Libertarian Luminaries and Anarcho-Capitalist Personalities Weigh In On Bitcoin Over the Years
Some people believe the decentralized cryptocurrency bitcoin is a tool that Austrian economists, anarcho-capitalists, libertarians, anarchists, and agorists should embrace. However, the many luminaries that have studied the works of Ludwig von Mises, and Murray Rothbard are still unsure about bitcoin. Some have embraced the cryptocurrency right away, while other individuals who pride themselves as ‘gold bugs’ changed their tune after initially dismissing bitcoin. Either way, bitcoin is very much a part of the anarcho/libertarian based ideologies and has been for quite some time.
Doug Casey
“As far as the cryptocurrencies are concerned, my original objection to Bitcoin was that it’s not backed by anything — So, it’s really a fiat currency — It’s very much like the US dollar, the Zambian Kwacha, the Argentine peso, or any of the other 150-plus currencies in today’s world — It’s a floating abstraction,” Casey explains in a recent interview.
But I missed something when I said, back then, that it had no value. It’s a fiat currency, but it has much more value than any other.
Dr. Ron Paul
As a firm believer in currency competition, I’m excited to see the options what bitcoin opens up.
Robert Murphy
“We are not predicting that bitcoin will eventually become a genuine money, rather we are arguing that at this point, the regression theorem of Ludwig von Mises has no bearing on the question at all,” explains Robert Murphy and Silas Barta’s book.
Whether bitcoin becomes a money, or forever remains a medium of exchange, is a purely empirical question to which the regression theorem has no relevance.
David Kramer
Peter Schiff
“It’s digital ‘fools gold,’” declares Schiff on CNBC. “You know today’s bitcoins are like beanie babies. The whole principle behind bitcoin was to replicate the properties that made gold uniquely suited to be money and act as an alternative to fiat currencies. But it’s not really viable as a money — I mean it is a potential medium of exchange, but it’s not a store of value.“
Konrad Graf
“My ‘On the Origins of Bitcoin’ also focuses on differentiating the pure theory aspect from historical and anthropological approaches,” Graf explains. “It seeks to integrate both Menger’s and Mises’s contributions with some distinctive insights from Nick Szabo (aspects of “Shelling Out: On the Origins of Money”) into a single account that can handle bitcoin, shell beads, silver coins, and anything else, all in a way I argue is compatible with the Misesian regression theorem.”
Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Don’t put your trust in democracy, but neither should you trust in a dictatorship. Rather, put your hope into radical political decentralization, not just in India and China, but everywhere.
Dr. Walter Block
“I favor money based on real commodities (gold, silver, whatever the market settles upon), and, I gather, bitcoins do not qualify — So, I oppose bitcoins,” explains Block.
I favor 100% backed (by a commodity) currency for reasons that Rothbard and Mises have written about, over and over again.
Gary North
“I hereby make a prediction: Bitcoin will go down in history as the most spectacular private Ponzi scheme in history,” details North.
It will dwarf anything dreamed of by Bernard Madoff. (It will never rival Social Security, however.)
Jeffrey Tucker
“Distributed networks change so much, perhaps everything,” Tucker details back in 2015.
As capital, it is not owned by any one institution, which is amazing. And yet it puts massive economic power into the hands of the individual.
Stefan Molyneux
“If we have a bitcoin universe, you don’t get to print money for war,” Molyneux once stated.
You don’t get to have money for a prison/industrial complex. You don’t get money for a war on drugs. You have to ask the people.
Is Bitcoin Anti-State, Anti-War, and Pro-Market?
There are many more well known Austrian economists and anarcho-capitalists who have a wide range of different views about bitcoin. We really can’t say what Mises, Menger or Rothbard would say about bitcoin with them not being around to witness the internet and blockchain technology. What we can do is formulate our own opinions by reading their works like the Misesian regression theorem, and other theories of what makes money. There are plenty of Austrian economists like Konrad Graf, Daniel Krawisz, and Robert Murphy who believe in bitcoin. It may take a long time for some of these other personalities to accept bitcoin, and some of them like Peter Schiff may never accept it at all.
What do you think of these economists and libertarian philosophers who are for or against bitcoin? Let us know what you think in the comments below.
Images via Pixabay, the Mises Institute, FEE, Lewrockwell.com, and wiki commons.
We got it all at Bitcoin.com. Do you want to top up on some bitcoins? Do it here. Need to speak your mind? Get involved in our forum. Wanna gamble? We gotcha.
The post Love It or Hate It: Anarcho-Capitalist Luminaries Weigh In On Bitcoin appeared first on Bitcoin News.
via Jamie Redman
0 comments:
Post a Comment