The importance of accepting the truth. 1. Not copper. Red. The bigger children in my Christian kindergarten bullied me and said, “Rune has red hair, Rune has red hair”. I complained about it to my mother, and I said that I wouldn’t go to the kindergarten anymore. She comforted me, and added, “it isn’t true, you have beautiful copper-brown hair”. My grandmother said the same, “no, Rune, it’s copper”. This didn’t, of course, stop any of the bullying. Christian adults who worked in the kindergarten didn’t try very hard to put an end to it either. They did, however, feed us with a lot of stories about Jesus Christ and how he handled conflicts. Jesus had said, “If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also”. So, I found myself in some sort of a prison. I had to attend kindergarten, and the rules created by those in charge, meant that my days were awful. Until one day, when something clicked. I came home and said: “No, mama. It’s true that I have red hair”. When the bullies understood that I had accepted my faith, their incentives to behave badly quickly faded. Accepting the truth had made me impervious to their insults. When I look back at this story, I think it was fundamental in shaping my belief system, and that the belief system that I over the years would equip me with made the whole difference to me. 2. People’s belief system is civilizations layer zero. It affects all the other layers. If people have an antihuman belief system, it will harm the rest of the society. It will make us destroy more than we create, which is the very opposite of one of the superpowers that sets us apart from other species. Believing in things that aren’t true is one example of something that is antihuman. If, for instance, enough people believe that the state is benevolent, that it is a creator that helps us, and that we therefore need to be subservient to it, then this an example of a belief system that isn’t true, and that will punish us repeatedly. 3. The golden age At the turning of the 19th Century the western civilization was at the peak of the golden age. It had never happened before in the history of humankind that so many people had been pulled out of poverty. This period, which lasted from the end of the Napoleon war in 1813 and until WWI in 1914, also produced some of the greatest inventions, such as the telegraph, the internal combustion engine and the airplanes. These inventions also represented a tremendous promise to mankind – more freedom, and more safety. 4. The belief system in the golden age The golden 101 years from 1813 to 1914 came about because kings and their people alike where tired of endless wars. These wars had been fueled by inflation – the king’s ability to borrow money from their central banks, which printed money out of nothing. This evil innovation had started in Sweden in 1669. By printing money out of thin air to finance the wars, and requiring everybody to accept the states’ official banknotes, the kings could extract all of the savings of the people and the fruits of their labor, without having to levy unpopular taxes. When the delegates met in 1787 to write the draft paper that would become the United States constitution, several of the founding fathers argued that inflation was a crime against humanity. Their experience with how the Bank of England had supported the English war machine during the American revolution had a lasting effect on the United States. Despite many efforts from powerful financiers throughout the 19thcentury, the US government didn’t establish a central bank until before 1914. In addition to the principles of individual liberty, freedom of speech, protection of property rights and trade, recognizing as a fact that manipulation of the money supply was evil was at the core of the civilization’s development in the golden age. In much of the 19th century, the US was on a de facto “monetary freedom” standard, where people were free to use the money, they liked best. Towards the end of the century, most countries tied their official currencies to gold, ensuring that the money supply increased very slowly. 5. The size of the state in the golden age Sound money and a great deal of respect for individual human rights enabled a century which was unprecedented when it came to peace and prosperity. The flipside was that the state apparatus was very, very small, as compared to what the normal situation is today. The public sector’s use of money in 1900 was 6% of GDP in Norway, and in 1902 it was 7% in the United States. People rarely had anything to do with the state. 6. The tragedy of 1914 and its aftermath When World War I broke out in 1914, most states ordered their central banks to shut the doors to block people from withdrawing golds and their savings from their banks. This kicked off a century of wars and inflation, which has lasted up until today. Once governments again could create money free of charge, they quickly gained in power and size. Over time, the growth and strength they gained due to the inflation policy enabled them to increase taxes. As a result, the public sector’s spending is almost equivalent to two-thirds of the GDP in Norway, and a little less than half of the GDP in the US. This development has developed in tandem with the change in people’s belief systems. Today most people believe that they depend on the state apparatus, and not the other way around. 7. The redhead’s ancestors Let’s jump 1000 years back in time. In my region of Trøndelag, my ancestors enjoyed the rights to use the money that they liked best – monetary freedom. The Trønders’ right to life and property were secured by the law, which had developed spontaneously over generations. Unlike the other regions in the Nordic countries, we had some basic rules which were called the resistance provisions. The Frostating law stated: “No man shall do tilferd* to a man, neither the King nor any other man. But if the King does so, an army arrow [war messenger] shall be cut. It shall go in all eight counties, and all the peasants shall go against the King and kill him if they can. But if the King escapes, he shall never be allowed to return to the country. Whoever will not go against him shall make three marks, and likewise the one who does not pass on the arrow.” «Tilferd*» was the same as someone taking someone else’s property without the consent of the Frostating (the parliament in Trøndelag). The provision set up a principle of separation of powers aimed at protecting the people of Trøndelag against dictatorial royal power. Violation of the law led to harsher punishment for the king than for others. The law entailed both the right and the duty of the Trønders (residents of Trøndelag) to kill the King if he took people’s property, for example by imposing taxes, if it was not previously approved by the Frostating. 8. The belief system in the Viking Age in Trøndelag. The resistance provisions were likely born out of the acknowledgement of the fact that freedom comes at a cost. If you decided to live in this area, you would have to obey the law, pass on the war arrow, and risk your own life to kill the king. 9. The end of monetary freedom in Trøndelag My ancestors’ freedom ended in 1050. It broke down immediately after King Harald Hardraade killed the powerful Trønder, Earl Einar Tambarskjelve, and his son Eindride, and Einars soldiers and the people of Trøndelag didn’t dare to revenge their leader. As soon as Einar was out of the way, Hardraade establish the rule of inflation in Norway. 16 years later, he brought ruin to the Norwegian people when he lost the battle of Stamford Bridge in an effort to conquer the throne of England. 10. Conclusion Now in the last few years, after having studied monetary policy and written books about this, I have realized that there is a fundamental connection between the people’s belief system and the monetary system we get. I have concluded that the monetary system is civilization’s layer one. It’s built on top of the belief system, and it forms the basis for all the other layers. Rule number one in any healthy belief system is that you respect truth for what it is. For me it started when I told my mother about the color of my hair. As I said, my situation in the kindergarten had been prison-like. And with an ever-growing state and human rights that are being eroded in a frightening tempo by the politicians, you might feel something of the same today. As a first step, try to reorient your belief system. Try to identify what you think is true, and respect it. *** Thank you for reading. This piece was partly based on my book Fraudcoin, as well as my upcoming book Arrow of Truth. If you found this interesting, feel free to hit like and follow me here on X.
Once a rebel - always a rebel image
It's about 300 years since Voltaire said it. image
If I ran for office today, this would be my political platform: 1. Abolish the government's currency monopoly 2. Remove the capital gains tax 3. Cut taxes and public spending 10% per year, every year, in infinity
National currencies are debt money, a.k.a. analogue shitcoins. You must be a finance wiz working for the government to think that piling digital shitcoins like CBDCs on top of a landfill with analogue shitcoins will be a great idea. Good luck, schmuck.
#Bitcoin is self defense
Central banks essentially underwrite crimes against humanity. #fraudcoinbook #Bitcoin    #monetaryfreedom #inflation
Gathering is the new gold standard image
There is never a boring moment in the Bitcoin space. The heated discussions on the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 300 (BIP300) has been a thought provoking spectacle. The debate is in itself a healthy sign. It also reflects that open protocols create coordination problems that can be difficult to solve. The BIP300 debate BIP300 is a proposal which aims at tweaking the core of the Bitcoin network in order to facilitate the development of technical layers that can connect with the core, and which can provide a higher capacity for monetary transactions. The main argument seems to be that developing such services is too costly today because Bitcoin core is clunky, and that speeding up the development of these services is necessary, because governments might soon find out how they can destroy Bitcoin. The rationale seems to be that rapid Bitcoin adaption will make it politically difficult for governments to do this. Changing the Bitcoin protocol involves an unknown risk, and the first counterargument is therefore that the risk has to be close to zero. The Bitcoin maxis argue that it's more important to maintain a robust core network, than to lower the cost of development of services built on top of the core. Challenges with open protocols There are benefits and disadvantages of open protocols. One benefit can for instance be that they attract great minds, and that more brains produce better ideas. Another benefit is that these systems don't have a single attack vector that enemies can exploit. Take out one of the volunteering developers, and ten will replace him - it's a waste of time and money. A disadvantage can be that it can be difficult for the developers to coordinate themselves and agree on which ideas that are best. Another can be that it takes time to solve coordination problems when no single person is appointed leader. The importance of Bitcoin Bitcoin tries to solve civilization's worst problem: Governments' manipulation of the money supply. If it succeeds, it may become a public infrastructure which is as importance to mankind as the open seas. In this perspective, the impatience that some have with implementing BIPs to facilitate faster and better services built on top of the Bitcoin core feels a bit like someone wanting to mix chemicals into the water in an attempt to reduce its density, for the sake of enabling boats to travel faster. In this way, one doesn't have to invest so much in the development of boats. "Smart improvements at the first layer, saves money and time in the development of the second layer." The benefits of manipulating the water might seem obvious, but the risks are of course unknown and potentially huge. Central planners The proponents of rapid development of Bitcoin's core network reminds me of bureaucrats and politicians who always come out in favor of more central planning and technocracy, because they believe free people and non-governmental institutions are unable to coordinate themselves in an efficient way that can serve society. So they come up with plans with the promise of making huge benefits tomorrow, instead of waiting in years for selfish-minded players to get their act together. The government threat Although governments are able to slow down Bitcoin adaption, I have yet to find a convincing argument for how they could be able to destroy Bitcoin. So the question is, why don't the proponents of BIP300 instead try to communicate clear arguments of how governments could succeed with killing off Bitcoin, and facilitate a discussion about it? Do they think it's too urgent? Do we have so little time that we cannot afford to debate the risk first? Or is the argument that discussing the risk openly increase the risk of governments finding a way to destroy Bitcoin? I'm not convinced, but please enlighten me. How to speed up adaption I do think that there are many other reasons why it is good if we can speed up adaption. But there is much that can be achieved at the social layer, especially by making it easier for people to understand what Bitcoin solves, how it solves it and how fast it's already solving it. When I started looking into Bitcoin I noticed that many Bitcoiners said that you need to study Bitcoin and economics for "hundreds" or even "thousands" of hours before you can understand it. For me this looked like an exaggeration, like someone finally had found their tribe, and that they wanted it to be exclusive. But this thought gradually disappeared when I began looking at the litterature. Some of it was pretty good. But the general impression was that information about Bitcoin and the problem it's meant to solve wasn't communicated in a way that was easily accessible for the general public. Most of it was written by technical people for technical people. Other stuff was obviously written by economists for economists. And a suprisingly big share of the litterature was of a philosophical nature, written by and for people who were deep into Bitcoin, and who already understood its technicalities and the economics. The information was also very fragmented. And to make things worse - I often found information that was in contradiction with other information. To me the overall impression can be summed up as an intellectually noisy environment. I get the impression that many others have come to the same conclusion, and that things now seem to improve. I also suspect that we will see noticeable investments flowing into this corner of the Bitcoin space. Furthermore, the demand for information about Bitcoin seems to grow. A significant share of the population might soon begin looking for accessible information that enable them to understand what it is, especially if we get another bullrun. When that happens, we better have to be ready. Conclusion Technical improvements of the Bitcoin protocol might be necessary to tighten the network's security. However, improving the features of Bitcoin core to facilitate a higher adaption speed isn't a compelling argument. There is plenty room to improve things at the social layer instead, especially with regards to how we communicate what Bitcoin is and what it solves. I actually think that this is going to be relatively smooth sailing and that the effects will be massive. The reason why I am optimistic, is the following: Nothing beats the network effect you get when you combine a sound monetary system with sound ideas that are well communicated.
Q: Why does #Bitcoin keep growing so incredibly fast? A: Nothing has a stronger network effect than the combination of knowledge and money