• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Idelto

Cryptocurrency news website

  • About
  • Monthly analysis
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
  • Bitcoin/Ethereum
  • How to invest in cryptocurrencies
  • News

anti-state

‘Bitcoin Is the Biggest Jailbreak in Human History,’ Says Philosopher Stefan Molyneux

22/02/2021 by Idelto Editor

'Bitcoin Is the Biggest Jailbreak in Human History,' Says Philosopher Stefan Molyneux

On February 19, the Canadian podcaster and Freedomain Radio host, Stefan Molyneux, discussed his thoughts about bitcoin following the crypto asset’s tumultuous rise capturing over a trillion-dollar market valuation. Molyneux’s recent speech describes the liberating potential bitcoin could bring to the masses and how the crypto network has the ability to change humanity for the better.

‘Bitcoin Is a Currency That Serves the People at the Expense of the Parasites’

Just recently the crypto evangelist and philosopher, Stefan Molyneux, spoke about the Bitcoin blockchain in great detail. Molyneux opened his speech by answering a question about BTC and ETH having a hard time scaling. The Freedomain radio host said that it is good to critique, but that people in the crypto space wouldn’t give up so easily.

Molyneux mentioned that bitcoin’s market capitalization just crossed the trillion-dollar milestone and noted that the people who have added that value won’t throw in the towel. He insisted that many crypto proponents have given a decade of their lives toward spreading adoption, and mentioned there are solutions like bitcoin cash (BCH) and the Lightning Network.

“The Bitcoin community is composed of just about the most brilliant, and economically and ideologically motivated human beings on the planet,” Molyneux stresses in his video. “Bet against them at your freaking peril, because Bitcoin is not just an alternative currency, it’s not just a store of value, it’s not just a cool public ledger. Bitcoin is a passionate FU to the powers that be,” Molyneux adds.

'Bitcoin Is the Biggest Jailbreak in Human History,' Says Philosopher Stefan Molyneux
Freedomain Radio philosopher and anarcho-capitalist, Stefan Molyneux.

The Freedomain philosopher continues: “Bitcoin, as I’ve argued publicly in speeches many years ago— Bitcoin is the potential end to war, to end hyperinflation, to end intergenerational debt— Bitcoin is a mission of mercy to the future— Bitcoin is the Jesus to the new conference of the religion of peace called crypto. Bitcoin is the people regaining control over their currency for the first time in the history of the world— Bitcoin is currency democratized, unpolitized, unpredatored.”

Molyneux added:

Bitcoin is a currency that serves the people at the expense of the parasites, rather than the currency which serves the parasites at the expense of the people at the moment. Bitcoin is rescuing your precious labor from being hoovered up endlessly by the invisible vampire mosquitoes of central banking.

Today’s Fiat Currency Is Slavery Tethered to Unborn Generations

The philosopher continues by commending the Bitcoin community and says that the people in crypto are “seriously brilliant.” Beautiful and “deranged people,” he says that are “committed to the future of peace and plenty that Bitcoin could represent.”

'Bitcoin Is the Biggest Jailbreak in Human History,' Says Philosopher Stefan Molyneux

Molyneux further notes that the current fiat currency distributed by the world’s oligarchic bureaucracy is “slavery.”

“What we understand is currency now is slavery. The currency is summoned into existence at the expense of your children’s futures. What you think of as a dollar sign is a slow jugular sucking noose twined and twisted around the necks of your children,” Molyneux reveals.

National debt, Molyneux continues to highlight is “a real human trafficking problem.” You need to understand the Bitcoin space he adds. “The passion that these incredibly brilliant people have brought to bear on the oldest human problem— How do you store a value so that thieving predatory vampiric assholes can’t get their jugular sucking tentacles on it at all times? How do you store value so that you can actually come back to it?” Molyneux asked.

He adds:

Civilization is all about the storing of value. How do you store value? That’s civilization you understand. Bitcoin is about how you store value so that [parasites] can’t get their hands on it. They just can’t. You put your money in the bank, inflation eats it away, you store your meat by the river, the flies lay their eggs in it and you can’t eat it, you got gold coins in Rome, they put all kinds of a bimetallic [crap] into the gold and destroy its value in your hand.

‘The Likes of a Revolution That We Have Never Ever Ever Seen Before in Human History’

Molyneux says that humans are all about storing value and in the evangelist’s opinion, the storage and retention of value is everything in life. “By creating something that can store value outside the state, that is the likes of a revolution that we have never ever ever seen before in human history,” the philosopher insists.

“If shells on some island are the currency,” Molyneux details in an analogy. “Then you need three shells a day to live, and if you get four shells, someone’s gonna take the fourth shell. Then tomorrow you won’t bother to get the fourth shell. You just stick with getting three shells and nothing will ever progress, because nothing can be saved or stored up in value. Nothing ever gets built because everything you build is going to be taken away from you,” he added.

'Bitcoin Is the Biggest Jailbreak in Human History,' Says Philosopher Stefan Molyneux
“Bitcoin is the biggest jailbreak in human history,’ Molyneux’s video highlights.

Molyneux continues: “Imagine… everything you build is going to get taken away. It’s happening [right] now, you understand. Everything you have built is already taken away by unfunded liabilities, national debt, inflation— Everything you build is already taken away. You are just holding it now to have it for a little while to give you the illusion so you can go to work tomorrow.”

Bitcoin Represents a New Financial System That Doesn’t Leverage the Unborn as Collateral

Molyneux says you can have a house. But it’s really not your house. He highlights that you have to pay the government every year to keep it.

“And the government put it in so much debt and you in so much debt, that it’s gonna be owned by some foreign bankster, at some point,” Molyneux’s speech details. “Or the entire currency is going to collapse and society goes back to savage gangs and you lose your house. You pretend you have a house, you pretend you have electricity, you pretend you have a car, you pretend you have everything but you have nothing.”

The Freedomain radio host further says:

You know this 2030 ‘you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy,’ [that’s the way it is] now. In fact you owe, you don’t own, you owe. You are only allowed to pretend you own something so that you will get up and go to work tomorrow. That’s it man.

Bitcoin has changed this course, Molyneux emphasizes. Bitcoin is the first of its kind that can actually keep parasites away from stealing value he notes. He says that the society we live in today treats babies and the unborn as “collateral.” Bitcoin can bolster a system that does away with such an immoral system.

“If you generally understood how much debt was taken out on your behalf just because you are breathing,” Molyneux notes. “If you genuinely looked at that math, you can find it pretty easy,” he added.

Molyneux’s speech continues for another 20 minutes longer, and news.Bitcoin.com readers can watch the rest of his speech here.

What do you think about Stefan Molyneux’s recent Bitcoin speech? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.

Filed Under: Anarcho-capitalism, anti-state, Anti-war, Bitcoin, Bitcoin (BTC), Central Banking, cryptocurrency, Currency, debt, Debt Slaves, English, Featured, free markets, freedom, Freedomain Radio, Freedomain.com, Jailbreak, liberty, money, National Debt, News Bitcoin, philosophy, Stefan Molyneux, Voluntaryism

James Sweet: Voices of Dissent

25/12/2020 by Idelto Editor

James Sweet: Voices of Dissent

If you are a voice of dissent, you have a unique opportunity. You live in a time that puts you at an advantage to change the world for the better. It’s true that the world is always changing; change is the only constant. But I am convinced that you have a strong say in how it will change. This is a time when the despotic rackets of the world behave like cornered rats, becoming more vicious in their desperation. You have a choice of whether to let them bite you or to bring down your heel. What will you do?

James Sweet: Voices of Dissent
**The following essay was written by James Sweet and published on July 26, 2002. “Voices of Dissent” was originally published on antistate.com and is reprinted here on Bitcoin.com for historical preservation. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any opinions, content, accuracy or quality within the historical editorial.**

It seems easy enough for one to find a constant and steady outpouring of ethical and utilitarian arguments against the State, but precious few that deal with how to dismantle said State, or at least how to live more freely in its midst. I’ve put in some advice of my own on the practice of anarchy (see, “A Plan of Direct Action,” and the sequel and e-mail me with any input of your own or if you’d like to see it put into action) and while the “how”-to-“why” ratio on the Internet and elsewhere is still pretty meager, there’s a growing amount of practical advice out there. Any good search engine will turn up some leads regarding self-sufficiency untaxed commerce, even monkeywrenching if you have time to kill… For the next couple of decades.

Financial non-participation is the second biggest factor in the State’s demise. Tax resistance, and intentionally drawing funds away from the government via the welfare system, have already gone a long way toward collapsing the system under its own weight.

But the biggest factor is active non-participation. No government employees = No government. No jurors, no conscripts, no pencil-pushers… No dice. The U.S. government is already dangerously understaffed, but I feel sorry for the folks who hang on to the last out of a hunger for power. You’ll have to choose for yourself how the epilogue will take shape in your neighborhood. Power is the most binding addiction I know of, and I think it entirely likely that everyone from former senators on down to former infantrymen will turn freelance and take their marauding directly to the homes and businesses of America. And whether you fight back or offer them coffee is your choice as well.

James Sweet: Voices of Dissent

But I digress. To separate verbal dissent from practical overthrow is to create a false dichotomy. Dissent is overthrow by inches. Protests do make a difference. Just imagine going back in time to World War One, and telling a pacifist that someday protests and civil disobedience would effectively put an end to the draft. Do you think he’d dare to believe you? Go back further to the first half of the nineteenth century, and imagine telling an abolitionist about an America with no slavery in the traditional sense, and a young generation that has a hard time even understanding racial prejudice. And not because of war, not because of Congress, not because of the President, not because of new constitutional amendments or reams of new laws; but because of a massive shift in the way people regard personal freedom and natural rights. Think that might be received as just a tad optimistic? So do I.

People in the entertainment industry tend to defend free speech on the grounds that speech doesn’t directly affect people. I defend free speech because I know it does affect people. Speech doesn’t force anyone to do anything, but that’s not to say it doesn’t affect people. Never underestimate the power of the pen.

So get to work and write and speak what you know in your heart to be true. You don’t have to be a flawless writer. You don’t need a college degree. If you speak with conviction, people will listen to you. To the extent that people know that they don’t need government, they will undermine said government’s existence.

Not only can the State be abolished, it cannot exist if the masses dissent. Once the shroud is lifted, once the majority see that the emperor has no clothes, it’s all over. And the future isn’t written out. One racket doesn’t have to be replaced by another. Never before have more people had a clearer vision of what shape a free society can take. You can make it happen, and you can do so within your own lifetime.

So go forth, speak out!

What do you think about James Sweet’s “Voices of Dissent?” Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.

The post James Sweet: Voices of Dissent appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Filed Under: Anarchism, anti-state, Anti-war, Bitcoin, dissent, English, Financial Freedom, free markets, Historical Essay, James Sweet, Market Anarchy, natural rights, News Bitcoin, non-participation, Op-ed, Personal Freedom, Voices of Dissent

Robert Rorschach: 20 Reasons Not to Vote

05/09/2020 by Idelto Editor

Robert Rorschach: 20 Reasons Not to Vote

If one votes, one participates. If one participates, one condones and endorses the process, and subsequently, what those elected ‘representatives’ do and say in your name.

Reason 2. Electoral promises are meaningless because politicians are able to lie to gain the favor of the electorate, and then do exactly what they want once they have it. Then there is no accountability or recourse, other than waiting another four years or so to vote them out and replace them with someone else who will follow the established template and do the exact same thing.

Robert Rorschach: 20 Reasons Not to Vote
**The following essay was written by Robert Rorschach and published on July 26, 2016. “20 Reasons Not to Vote” was originally published on the website notbeinggoverned.com, and is reprinted here on Bitcoin.com for historical preservation. Many cryptocurrency advocates who identify with voluntaryism believe that voting is immoral, and joining the counter-economy is a better method of change. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any opinions, content, accuracy, or quality within the historical editorial.**

3. The act of voting grants legitimacy to the idea that it’s acceptable for the majority/collective to use the coercive arm of the state to impose their will on the minority/individual using force, or threat of force, and for that reason, it is immoral to vote. As such, the only way to truly de-legitimize the system is by not voting. When the people refuse to participate in droves the international community can no longer recognize the results of the election as legitimate. This perceived legitimacy is such a concern for politicians that in some countries it’s now a legal requirement to vote (e.g., Australia).

4. A non-voter emerges from the electoral process with a clean conscience because they can legitimately proclaim that what the elected ‘representatives’ subsequently say and do after they have gained power is not done in their name, not with their permission, and not with their encouragement.

5. To not vote DOES NOT mean one relinquishes the right to then comment on, complain about, or protest the actions of the government, it is completely the other way round. When one votes one effectively makes a contractual agreement (the voter is officially recorded doing so), which hands over the right for someone else to speak and act in their name, and as such, assents to whatever the government does thereafter. A non-voter however, has not done so, and therefore retains the right to complain, object and protest all they want.

6. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) reinforces the idea that people can’t live together without violent control.

7. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) implies that the majority knows what’s best for everyone.

8. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) implies that the majority knows what’s best for the individual.

9. Voting is effectively participating in mob rule, and the mob then enforces it’s views on the rest of society with the threat of violence.

10. By voting, an individual literally advocates the use of force against peaceful people.

11. Voting reinforces the idea the ‘people’ have the power rather than the largely unaccountable bureaucrats who make the rules.

12. Voting is futile because invariably the better-financed candidate wins.

13. Statistically, any one vote makes no more difference than a single grain of sand on a beach. Thinking that their vote counts tends to give the voter a mistakenly inflated sense of self-worth, and participation in a system creates a passive sense of accomplishment.

14. An individual’s ability to make an informed choice is zero if the only information they reference is from the overtly bias mainstream media, government news channels (propaganda), politicians and party manifestos (sales pitch), or from an ‘enforced’ state school education (indoctrination).

15. Voting sends a false signal to the elected politicians that the voter approves of all their policies. Voters, therefore, encourage them.

16. If an individual has not come to a firm conclusion about the election, that individual will do more for their country/community by not voting, rather than making a mistake.

17. If the outcome of a vote is unknown, then voting is tantamount to gambling. If the outcome of a vote is known, then voting is futile.

18. No individual has the authority to make laws their neighbor, or anyone else, must obey. Then how is it morally acceptable for any individual to delegate authority they don’t have to someone else, such as a politician?

19. Should people who know more about game shows, sports, reality TV, and celebrities, rather than matters of any real importance (economics, political philosophy, history, logic, critical thinking, etc) be in a position to vote and influence the lives of others?

20. Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting evil.

The 20 reasons not to vote boil down to this:

If you are not a Voluntaryist, then by definition you are an Involuntaryist, and as such, personally advocate the initiation of force, or threat of force against people who haven’t threatened or harmed anyone. Therefore, for every person in the world one of these statements is true:

1) “I advocate a society whereby people are free to voluntarily interact with one another.”
2) “I advocate the use of force, or threat of force, against innocent people, in order to make them comply with my opinions and preferences.”

If the first statement refers to you, then DON’T VOTE.

If you are interested in learning about the many methods of voluntaryism, crypto anarchy, and the myriad of ways to opt-out and vacate the state – Check out these essays below.

  • No Treason by Lysander Spooner
  • The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose
  • The John Galt Speech by Ayn Rand
  • Bitcoin by Satoshi Nakamoto
  • An Agorist Primer by Samuel Edward Konkin III
  • The many writings hosted at Zerogov.com
  • Vices Are Not Crimes by Lysander Spooner
  • Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt
  • Man Economy and State by Murray Rothbard
  • Universally Preferable Behavior – A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics by Stefan Molyneux
  • The Fundamentals of Voluntaryism
  • Everything Voluntary
  • The Jones Plantation by Larken Rose
  • The Free Market: What it is – What it Implies by Tom Rose
  • The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto by Tim May

What do you think about the 20 reasons not to vote for the political class? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.

The post Robert Rorschach: 20 Reasons Not to Vote appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Filed Under: Agora, Agorism, Anarcho-capitalism, anti-state, Bitcoin, Capitalism, cryptocurrency, de-legitimize the system, English, Historical Essay, News Bitcoin, Op-ed, Opinion, Opt-Out, politicians, Representatives, Robert Rorschach, status quo, Voluntaryism, Voting

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government

06/06/2020 by Idelto Editor

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government

“What is tragic about political government?” you might ask. Let us return to that question once we have examined the nature of political government and the State. In order to distinguish between government and other institutions in society we must look at the ways human behavior can be organized and human needs and desires satisfied.

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government
**The following essay was written by Carl Watner and published in 1996. “The Tragedy of Political Government” was originally published on various websites; including voluntaryist.net and is reprinted here on Bitcoin.com for historical preservation. Carl Watner approves of the reprinting of his articles under public commons. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any opinions, content, accuracy or quality within the historical editorial.**

There are only two ways: peacefully or coercively. There are no other alternatives. If people rely on peaceful cooperation, they must necessarily offer products or services for which other people are willing to trade. If people use coercion or fraud, we call it obtaining goods or services under false pretenses, robbery, or larceny. However we label it, the basic contrast remains the same: one relies on voluntaryism or one relies on force.

A stranger knocks at your door and, upon opening it, he requests money He represents the March of Dimes, and is asking for donations to support its activities. Unless you feel generous, you dismiss him. You have no particular obligation to support his cause, and the fact is you have already contributed to other charities, such as the United Way. Unless the stranger is a blatant thief, he leaves. He doesn’t deal with you by using force, or its threat, to collect the money he is soliciting.

Compare this to what happens every April 15th in the United States. Granted, most “good citizens” send in their tax payments to the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS does not need to send out a representative to collect the tax; and if there is any need to do so, he generally needn’t carry a gun or make any direct display of force.

Why don’t people dismiss the IRS in the same manner as they would the solicitor who is collecting for a private cause? Many would, except they know that there is a big difference between the March of Dimes and the IRS. The March of Dimes organization is a group of private individuals assembled together for the common purpose of overcoming polio, muscular dystrophy, and birth defects. They do not use force, or the threat of force, to accomplish their goals. Should they, we would have no hesitation in calling the March of Dimes, and its solicitation agents, criminal.

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government

The IRS, on the other hand, represents the government, which – when all else fails – uses force to accomplish its goals. If you do not voluntarily pay your taxes, your property is confiscated, or you are jailed. The amazing thing about our government in the United States is that it rarely has to resort to force. There are tax resisters, but they form a small percentage of the population. Except for these few people, no one calls IRS agents criminals even when they brandish guns, confiscate property, or put people in jail. Despite the fact that they engage in the same type of behavior as the private thief or kidnapper, it’s seldom that their behavior is called criminal. Why is this so?

Government is the only institution in our civilized society that is able to cover its coercion (and its use of threats) in a shroud of mystique and legitimacy There are other individuals and groups in society that use force: individual criminals (the lone burglar, rapist, etc.), and groups of criminals (the Mafia or gangs of thieves, etc.). But none of these claim their activities are proper and useful. Government is the only one of these coercive groups that claims its use of force is legitimate and necessary to everybody’s wellbeing.

Government is the institutionalization of conquest over the people and property in a certain territory The stated purpose of government is protection. In reality it is exploitation: to extract resources which otherwise would not be voluntarily handed over to the governors. Governments excel in the use of force and threat – the political means of survival – by combining military conquest and ideology. Though throughout history, governments have been of many different types, their reason for being and modus operandi have never changed. Governing requires that those who govern authorize or commit criminal acts, – actions which, if used by any but the agents of the government, would be deemed criminal.

Governments seek the voluntary obedience of their populace. The continual use of physical force is not only expensive, but often of uncertain results. If the governors can get the governed to accept their conquest as being consistent with widely accepted norms and standards, there is little need to use raw force to continually compel submission. The primary tools which governments use to establish their legitimacy are:

  1. the use of nationalism and patriotism to inculcate the belief that the entire nation is a single community with a manifest destiny;
  2. the use of mass public “education” to socialize the younger generation and instill “acceptable” values in them;
  3. the use of psychological warfare to “brainwash” the populace into supporting the government at all costs.

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government

The truth of the matter is that governments use every means at their command to insure their control over society. Other methods include support of special interest groups with legislation and subsidies, celebration of national holidays, frequent elections, use of the secret ballot, sustaining foreign enemies to help maintain internal control, and the full panoply of patriotism.

The main tragedy of political government is that few people realize it is an immoral and impractical institution. Nor do they realize “that the power of any government is dependent on the cooperation of the people it governs, and that government power varies inversely with the noncooperation of the people.” They have been conditioned to accept government as a natural part of their environment. After being raised in a culture in which “politics” is the norm, and after attending years of public school and being taught that political government is a necessary component of society, most people place government in the same category as the weather – something they complain about, but can’t change. As people accept the structural trap called politics, they fail to realize that their actions support and undergird the State. Their demand for government services – from Social Security benefits to police protection – is what fuels the State.

Most people are capable of high values and responsible behavior, but once they enter the seductive garden of politics, they no longer notice that its wonders cannot be reconciled with individual responsibility and their own personal moral values of honesty and hard work. It is not usually apparent that what they are doing or supporting is vicious and would not pass the test of ordinary decency. So long as the criminality is veiled by the political process, most people accept it because they do not see that it conflicts with their basic values.

The main tragedy of political government is not only that the voters are the ones pointing the gun, but, most importantly, that the indecency of this act is concealed from them by the political process. It is the concealment that is the tragedy. The concealment is not the result of some conspiracy by some distant elite: it is inherent in the political process.

Perhaps the tragedy can be made more plain. Look at the daily news. At least half of every day’s news consists of accounts of one pressure group or another noisily appealing to the government for greater support of its special agenda. The tragedy is that the people making the demands do not perceive that it’s their own neighbors from whom they are stealing and sacrificing in order to support their special programs.

Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government
If you are interested in learning more about Voluntaryism and the writings of Carl Watner, Murray Rothbard, Wendy McElroy, and many others check out Voluntaryist.com, Mises.org, Fee.org, and AEIR.org.

The political process -purposefully- is an impersonal one. The secret ballot and the use of majority vote obscure the fact that it is the struggling family next door or the bachelor down the street who are being threatened at gunpoint if they do not fill the government’s coffers or follow its mandates. The resources for every government program come from hundreds of millions of people across the United States – most of them personally unknown to those who campaign for these programs. Few people would directly confront their neighbors with such demands (“Your money or your life!”), but the structure of politics permits this to be done anonymously, and allows the supporters and perpetrators to conceal – even from themselves – the evil nature of what they are doing. Such is the tragedy of political government.

What do you think about Carl Watner’s essay? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments below.

The post Carl Watner: The Tragedy of Political Government appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Filed Under: anti-state, Anti-war, Bitcoin, Carl Watner, counter economy, English, free markets, Mises.org, Monetary System, News Bitcoin, non aggression axiom, Op-ed, Opt-Out, Political Class, protest, System of Force, Tragedy, Voluntaryism, Voluntaryist, Voluntaryist.com

Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations

11/04/2020 by Idelto Editor

Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations

The oldest free market think tank in the United States, the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) has announced the 501(c)3 educational foundation now accepts bitcoin cash (BCH) for donations. The libertarian organization promotes sound economic theory, publishes books and articles regularly on the benefits of a laissez-faire attitude, and hosts lectures and conferences that aim to encourage the philosophy of freedom.

Also read: Bitcoin Going Industrial: New York-Based Natural Gas Provider Sells Fully Compliant ‘Hashpower Contract’

74-Year Old Libertarian-Based Foundation’s Relationship With Bitcoin

The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) is the longest-running American think-tank based on free market ideals and sound economics. Founded in 1946, the group was created by some of the smartest libertarian thinkers and economists of the time with individuals such as Henry Hazlitt, Leonard E. Read, Leo Wolman, and Fred R. Fairchild. FEE is solely dedicated to the “economic, ethical and legal principles of a free society” and the educational foundation provides a number of resources for those interested in learning the philosophy of liberty. The think tank is a 501(c)3 foundation and professors and parents have leveraged FEE for the last 74 years.

Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations

FEE has accepted BTC for a number of years and this week the foundation has revealed it is now accepting bitcoin cash (BCH) for donations as well. At the end of 2013, FEE received a massive 1,000 BTC donation ($6.9M) from Bitcoin.com’s Executive Chairman Roger Ver, which at the time was worth over $1 million. At the time Ver made a bet that BTC would outperform the U.S. stock market by a specific time and lost the wager by being off by a few months. “ I’ve decided to donate 1,000 Bitcoins, that were worth only $10,000 at the time I made the bet, but are now worth well over $1,000,000 USD, to the organization that published the books and articles that allowed me to understand just how important Bitcoin would become,” Ver said in November 2013. The entrepreneur further stated:

That organization is the Foundation for Economic Education. By reading books, and essays published by this organization from such intellectual giants as Murray Rothbard, and others, I learned that those who want to control their neighbor’s activities through the violence of the state, are economically ignorant, morally deplorable, and will always fail to reach their desired goals.

Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations
The founders of FEE (from left to right) David Goodrich, Fred R. Fairchild, Donaldson Brown, Leonard E. Read, Henry Hazlitt, Leo Wolman, and Claude E. Robinson.

Multi-Crypto Acceptance and Promoting Liberty in Times of Crisis

Now users can donate bitcoin cash to FEE as the foundation has opened its doors to multi-crypto acceptance. Donations go toward educational resources, the publishing of free market literature, and free online courses. Right now think tanks like FEE, Mises.org, and many others are needed more than ever because governments have continued to relentlessly oppress individuals. Just like the myriad of crisis situations that have taken place in the past, governments are using the coronavirus outbreak to steal people’s liberties. These ghastly members of society have caused much ill throughout the world and its been far worse than every deadly virus known to man. FEE utilizes core programs that produce student seminars, educator resources, online education, engaging videos and informative books about how a free society can benefit the world a great deal.

Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations

Donors can learn about FEE’s history and even review the organization’s finances for accountability. “[FEE] adheres to the strictest of standards in financial and programmatic transparency, earning the highest ratings from both Charity Navigator (four stars) and Guidestar (Platinum),” the foundation’s website notes. FEE’s resources have impacted the lives of millions of people and the organization’s strength shows there’s resonating effectiveness when it comes to economic freedom.

What do you think about FEE accepting bitcoin cash (BCH)? Let us know in the comments below.

The post Free Market Think Tank FEE Now Accepts Bitcoin Cash Donations appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Filed Under: $1 million, 1000 BTC, 1946, 2013, 501(c)3 foundation, 74-years, anti-state, Anti-war, Bitcoin.com Executive Chairman, Conferences, Donation, economic, Educational Resources, English, FEE, Fred R. Fairchild, free course, free market think tank, free markets, Henry Hazlitt, Leo Wolman, Leonard E. Read, Libertarianism, Mises.org, Murray Rothbard, News, News Bitcoin, online books, online reading material, professors, Roger Ver, seminars, U.S., violence of the state, Voluntarism

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Archives

Recents articles

  • Report: Asia’s Cryptocurrency Landscape the Most Active, Most Populous Region ‘Has an Outsize Role’
  • JPMorgan Says Investors Can Put 1% of Their Portfolios in Bitcoin Despite Calling It a Poor Hedge
  • Harvard Professor Kenneth Rogoff Warns Central Banks Will Never Allow Bitcoin to Go Mainstream
  • Institutional Investors Pile Into Crypto Exchange-Traded Products: Managed Assets Rise to $44 Billion This Month
  • The $282 Million Awakenings: 120 Bitcoin Block Rewards from 2010 and 2011 Woke Up This Year
  • Despite The Bitcoin Price Dip, This Week Was Incredibly Bullish
  • Arca to Join the Bitcoin Trust Race Competing Against Numerous Crypto Fund Rivals
  • Investment Firm Launches the First ‘Crypto Hedge Fund’ in Spain- Plans to Expand Across Europe, Latin America

© 2021 · Idelto · Site design ONVA ONLINE