It seems that there's something similar here. For most of the world, it's just natural that your government provides you with identity proof. USA and maybe other anglo countries could be the exception, although other times the question was discussed, I was told that, even if there is no official id card, other means like SS numbers provide an equivalent mechanism.
The movie plot, in which you are framed for some heinous crime and you need to go full Jason Bourne, is what justifies having a handful of fake passports, of course guns and a sizeable reserve of cash in a hole in the woods. Now it would be your bitcoin wallet and some sovereign identity keys in USB drives.
We need a balance of the various ideologies, and not the extremism of any one ideology.
Actually I think that those extreme views are a reaction to one ideology adopted by all mainstream parties. You see that no matter what you vote, you're going to be screwed, so you turn to fringe options.
we are indeed social creatures and we are developing new civic and social innovations. this mostly relates to actively opting into communities with people we like that share our values and that do not attempt to control us. and crypto/web3 enables us to exit the rotten institutions that try to coerce us into being part of them, and create new institutions that represent our values.
it is pretty obvious when you think about it. only institutions we actively and freely opt into can actually be legitimate.
and the idea that something that claims a monopoly on violence also claims to be legitimate is just completely, utterly laughable. and what is going on right now is that the clown car is finally flying off a cliff :)
If it is a minority position, how to convince more people? Or where to find a place to create a new society without free-riding on the existing one, etc.?
I'd rather take an extremely individualist culture and then fill in the gaps with taxation and some level of wealth redistribution.
Alternative to individualism is everything that is not based on individualism alone.
For example every social democracy out there the majority of which you can find in Europe.
We live in countries where we are individuals with rights but also we have to let go some of that individualism because the good of the many overrides the individual rights.
It's not very hard actually.
and we have plenty of examples from the last century of what do you get if you adopt the opposite values
Jean-Jacques Rousseau strongly disagrees with you.
I believe you confused individualism with autonomy and free will.
a society of individuals can easily become atomized and paradoxically uniform when “every citizen, being assimilated to all the rest, is lost in the crowd“.
-- Alexis de Tocqueville
a true pillar of modern developed World
The entire point of it being in crypto of course is that the same people and forces that push back so hard against it in meatspace are relatively powerless to do so in the cyptosphere.
For better or worse, I can't see that changing any time soon. I was in a meeting at a very large crypto exchange recently and their branded coffee cups all had a very simple message; "freedom is here". That's basically at the core of everything happening in the space, and I don't think arguing against it is going to work in any way shape or form given the polarised attitude toward the philosophy on either side of the cyptosphere border.
Like it or not, it's not going away, and it's swinging more towards extreme individualism by the day, not less.
Unfortunately, our society and culture has been going into more collectivist and totalitarian direction for quite a while, which is why there's so much economic and social issues.
"Leave me the hell alone"-people are just normal people who react to their freedom being violated.
I'm not a libertarian or a proponent of cryptocurrency. But I do think we can be clearer about what being "social creatures" means.
We are "social creatures" in the sense that we seek the advantages of group membership (safety, co-operation, food stability, shelter, school), but we are not social creatures in the sense that we want oppressive control and uniformity. Our "agreement" with being social is accompanied by resentment. In some cases, the resentment is pathological. (Conformity can be pathological too.)
Homo sapiens developed/evolved language, the amazing human protocol to support co-operation. But when we ask people to say everything that they are thinking without social consequences, we discover the degree to which people can be angry, rude, willfully ignorant, and even crazy. (Consider "social media" to be both a business and an unprecedented live experiment revealing social resentment.)
The cryptocurrency movement/phenomenon is a construct with significant flaws and ardent adherents who see their own interest fulfilled in the narrative. In this, it is nothing particularly special. But by definition a crowd of people who all seek total individuality will not cohere.
That's pretty much by definition. So-called "libertarian" and neoliberal posit that individuals are greedy yet emotionless rational actors.
Unsurprisingly, individuals with narcissistic tendencies flock to that.
building systems that give better control to users online is orthogonal to social goals.
not too much knobs on Facebook helped elect Trump, quite the opposite
We are social creatures. We sacrifice individual needs because we gain massive security and social value in return.
We need a balance of the various ideologies, and not the extremism of any one ideology.
Fifty years of narcissistic, anti-social, "Leave me the hell alone" libertarianism is at the heart of the culture-rot collapse we are facing.
We need people on hackernews and Ridgewood elsewhere developing civic and social innovations that deepen our connections, not replacing them with with increasingly inauthentic, algorithmic, trustless, artificial substitutes.