Yes, that's one of the most bizarre positions I've seen from proponents of crypto. It's somehow oddly optimistic?

It's the entire reason that it exists. If you can print endless amounts of money without accountability (and convince people it has value that it doesn't), you can do what you want.

If people realize "oh, this Bitcoin thing works just like those dollars and a government can't manipulate it," in time, yes, the military industrial complex will collapse. Not immediately and not without a fight, but eventually, yes.

Why then did war happen happily in the millennia in which money supply was almost entirely limited? Governments have the ability to buy currency if they can't/don't want to mint new coin.

For example, states have been issuing various forms of bonds to raise money for war since at least the 1600s.

You haven’t offered any kind of explanation at all here.

If there is a ‘fight’ involved, how will bitcoin owners fight against the military industrial complex?

By removing their money from the existing system and moving it into Bitcoin. If the dollar is the air supply, Bitcoin is the plastic bag over their proverbial head.

It’s pretty easy to stop businesses from accepting Bitcoin if you are the military industrial complex.

Black markets are hard to eliminate altogether but no real threat.

They'd have to shut down the internet. If you can generate an address, I can send you Bitcoin (the role of the internet is limited to broadcasting the transaction to the network).

So, no. Perhaps for a certain class of user—someone who depends solely on an exchange—they can stop them but ultimately, no. They'd be limited to showing up with guns.

It's not nearly as futile as it seems unless people buy into the propaganda.

Why would they need to shut down the internet to prevent business from accepting bitcoin? That makes no sense. A simple regulation or tax would do it.

Nobody is assuming it would disappear, people are only correctly observing that some of the cost to support the current world financial system is paid in blood.

If it wouldn’t disappear then it’s not a cost that can be attributed to the current financial system.

You may as well say that since the current financial system enabled the development of computers and the internet which were pre-requisites for the development of Bitcoin, then Bitcoin was paid in blood.

That's a bit too reductionist IMO. Human beings didn't invent suffering, animals rended each other limb from lim for eternity before us, so does that mean the suffering from warfare cannot be attributed to human beings, or that past suffering was not attributable to the state of the world then?? Warfare for profit existed before America, so does that mean the american military industrial complex cannot be attributed to America, or that Roman conquest cannot be attributable to Rome seeing as conquest did not disappear?

You can very clearly see that the current state of affairs is propped up with blood. That doesn't mean the future state of affairs won't also be supported by suffering and death, but that doesn't absolve the current state of things.

Nobody is trying to absolve anything. The point is that Bitcoin won’t either.

> If it wouldn’t disappear then it’s not a cost that can be attributed to the current financial system.

That's a pretty clear absolution.

Bitcoin might not solve this problem, but it (or I should say cryptocurrency) can resolve an existing problem with the financial system, that is, manipulating worldwide economics by manipulating money supply. Perhaps that level of economic control is used to prop up imperialism, colonialism and might makes right to some degree. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

>> If it wouldn’t disappear then it’s not a cost that can be attributed to the current financial system.

> That's a pretty clear absolution.

Not even close. You seem to be interested in attributing blame. My comment is about causality.

If your assumption is that the financial system is the cause of imperialist oppression, then you will also be likely to believe that an alternative financial system can be the cure.

I think that’s naïvely utopian. If Bitcoin is money, then powerful people will use it the same way money has always been used. At best you might reshuffle who is in power, but ultimately it will just be a case of “it’s my turn with the gun now”.

> If your assumption is that the financial system is the cause of imperialist oppression...

I've clearly stated my point: that the current world economic system is to some degree reliant on continuing oppressive warfare. That's the only claim I'm making.

I've also very clearly stated that my point is not that bitcoin is the cure, only that it would assist in toppling the current largest incentive for oppressive warfare. I've clearly stated that I don't think k it is a cure. You're arguing with yourself at this point.

> only that it would assist in toppling the current largest incentive for oppressive warfare

You have made no case for this.