Bitcoin may be the change we are all waiting for!

Many new ideas are ambitious when formed; But when the time comes, these same ideas become commonplace. Bitcoin is no exception. For example, if such an idea had been put forward in 2000, perhaps few would have accepted it; But now we see that the idea of ​​bitcoin has been implemented and has gained widespread acceptance.

Bitcoin has revolutionized the world economy. Creating a decentralized monetary system without government intervention, trading directly and with high security are some of the changes that Bitcoin has brought.

This article, published on the Bitcoin Magazine website, Note Joakim Book is a researcher at the US Institute for Economic Research. In this article, Bock takes a look at the problems facing humanity today and considers them all rooted in wrong choices, the search for quick solutions, superficiality, and attention to the appearance of problems instead of focusing on real change.

He goes on to describe bitcoin as a phenomenon that can help us make these important and meaningful changes. What you read below is from the author of this note.

A change to the name of Bitcoin

We live in a false world in which all ideals, currencies and languages ​​are imaginary. A world full of fraudulent strategies and wrong methods that can be used to make money quickly. Where success does not require much effort and hard work. In this empty world, it is enough to hide any flaws. We hide everything that is not as good as what we see in movies and try to show ourselves adorned to others with stylish clothes and masks. We will continue this false process until we convince ourselves and others that we are not corrupt inside and that we are even growing and progressing.

Many of us get our investment advice from a ticketing video. We buy GameStop options and pray for a miracle to happen. In times of failure, instead of identifying the main problem and accepting responsibility for our choices, we complain about the injustices of the capitalist system.

In appearance, we use solar panels and wind turbines in deserts, plains and ocean shores; But we are surprised by the frequent blackouts and figures of electricity bills. However, governments and environmentalists tell us that these energies are clean and that our subsidies are in the direction of developing these technologies. So such an approach is natural At Appearance Look good.

If a strange virus spreads rapidly in the world, we strongly criticize the inefficiency of the governments and planners of the world. However, we do not allow people to take responsibility for their own health, and we do not encourage them to eat better, exercise more, and be more active. Instead, we lock them up in their homes; Where the disease is much easier to spread to other family members and at the same time they can not get the vitamin D they need to fight the disease naturally. We pretend that the solution to this problem is a rapid and severe medical intervention; There is a consolidated solution that does not include advice on maintaining a healthy body and immune system.

We can only pretend that we can solve the world’s problems by creating a centralized planning system and the temporary relief of pain.

The world can be changed

I have had many experiences of encountering such writers in my career. A few years ago, the editors of the Guardian, Britain’s leading left-wing publication, decided to change the term climate change to “Climate Emergency” or “Climate Crisis”; An event that many readers of this magazine around the world admired.

Earlier this year, I learned that the Financial Times had followed in the footsteps of the Guardian, either voluntarily or because of pressure from its peers. A recent article in the magazine criticizing the high energy consumption of bitcoin included the phrase:

There should be no compromise between democratizing finances and weather emergencies.

It seems that the use of powerful words can make the main subject more influential! This is not the first time this has happened. The magazine’s editorial staff used such terms at least twice last year. It is interesting to note that until a few years ago, the Financial Times used a more conventional language to discuss various issues and climate change.

I could never understand the reason for this obsession and play with words. Are these really the words that this group of journalists utters, what keeps the world from aggressive climate policies, and at the same time what the intelligentsia desperately longs for?

A similar thing happened last year about ethnicity. A number of activists in the heat of racial warfare urged news outlets to capitalize the word “black” instead of a physical description of blacks to indicate that they were an ethnic group with a common heritage. This issue continued until the protests over the death of George Floyd, and the controversy was institutionalized by the New York Times, with the aim of honoring the historic sacrifices of black Americans and writing the word Black in capital letters B.

The Associated Press, on the other hand, which is the reference for many publications, entered into direct cultural debates in a similar situation by refusing to write the word White with the capital letter W. The statement from the publication said:

Because whites have less in common with history and culture, White’s phrase does not deserve to be promoted and capitalized on the letter W.

I do not pay attention to changing writing styles. I spend my life editing newsletters, quarterly reports and submitting to academic journals. Most publications use different styles and formats. Some people write titles in capital letters and others do not. Some write the full name and others rely on the initials of the words. A group follows a specific mechanism for letters and numbers; But other groups do not have such an approach.

These decentralized and emerging methods are very similar to the subject of language. In this field, everyone has their own ideas and opinions. Last year, at the annual celebration of black influence in American history, I advised one of my clients to use this new spelling method adopted by some publications; Because his article was precisely about the repression of black writers in the media and education, this spelling could have made the subject more tangible.

Spelling patterns, neutral gender pronouns, or other superficial labels are not issues that bother me. They just make it look better and give it a whirl. What really bothers me, and has no end, are the elitist elites who substitute wrongdoing for real and meaningful change.

If you really believe in the importance of your goal, you should do something about it instead of playing with words or presenting seemingly accurate news. If people care about your writing, it’s because of the content of your article, not because of the spelling method you choose. Although British spelling or punctuation is often uncommon for American audiences, this does not detract from the importance and status of celebrities such as Churchill or Orwell in their articles.

When it comes to Orwell, a group of journalists seem to have accepted a misconception that Orwell strongly criticized in his article Politics and the English Language.

Instead of covering the facts with correct interpretations, the writers exaggerate in expressing the concepts to the point that the reader is mentally indifferent to the importance of the subject.

If our current situation, according to these journalists, is critical, then how do they interpret the situation and the reasons when these crises increase? If inequalities can only be eliminated by moving the author’s pen, then why do we not live in a paradise of justice and abundance?

Do we really think that deep hatred for the race, gender, or sexual orientation of others can be cured by changing the way we write articles? Before we can convince and distance ourselves from these people, we will probably cause resentment and division among the people.

Steven Pinker, a professor at Harvard University, in his book Whiteboard: The Modern Denial of Human Nature (The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature), which writes about the process of changing interpretations, points out that concepts are formed in the human mind from the beginning; Not words.

If you change the name of something, the new word inherits the meaning of the previous word; But if you give a concept a new name, its name will be the same as its meaning.

In recent decades, I have seen the word cleaner become the caretaker, the employee, the custodian, and then the head of the facility, and I think that word will soon change to the executive director of garbage collection!

Changing the name of individuals does not change the nature of the work they do.

Says 16th century politician, writer and lawyer Thomas More:

Some people think the ground is flat, others say it is round. If the ground is flat, can the parliament of a country declare it round? If it is round, can the king’s order flatten it ?!

If we replace the rulers with journalists and the earth with the problems that exist today, we see that what Thomas said could be communicated and applied to society five centuries later.

Instead of striving for greatness, prosperity, or a secure life, we combine our deceptive ideals with quick fixes. We portray a glorious life on Instagram and express our feelings with jealousy over the last edited photo of our friend from the coast of Greece or Bali, Indonesia.

We feel relaxed in a dreamy way with watery TV series or some of Netflix shows that are often addictive; But we have nothing to do with the treasure trove of literature, human communication, and the beautiful sunset.

As soon as the effect of moments of pleasure and happiness passes for us, we turn to drugs or antidepressants that we think will save us from the abyss. If we suffer from high blood pressure or type 2 diabetes, we think that instead of exercising, eliminating carbohydrates and following a proper diet, we should turn to expensive drugs.

The suffering we endure for all these false things keeps us from the work and activity that can improve our lives; Good job to make money, exercise to stay healthy.

Yeah Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like Bitcoin aint for me either. But instead, Bitcoin offers a show of correctness, truth, and a refusal to accept nonsense.

Bitcoin leads its users to accept responsibility for life and finances, to look away from immediate pain to future achievements, and to make meaningful changes instead of outward changes.

There is no problem, no matter how much you want to fight semantic, literary, political and medical battles; But do not pretend that these actions bring your ideals a bit closer to reality. Cross-cutting solutions do not fix the world of drowning.

Conclusion

Bitcoin is a phenomenon whose idea, like many other technologies, may have seemed ambitious at first; But now it has made many changes in the world economic system. Creating a peer-to-peer monetary system with a decentralized, out-of-control nature, direct intermediation and high security are the changes that Bitcoin has brought with it.

Bitcoin is a revolution that has not only revolutionized finance, but can be the source of many other important changes in the world. Obviously, there are several issues that Bitcoin cannot solve; But with its unique features, it puts users on a path to accept responsibility for their lives and choices and focus on fundamental and meaningful change to solve problems instead of focusing on appearances.