The mistake that Satochi Nakamoto did not estimate: Greed and human avarice
The truth, the true, to advance despite the obstacles of the unfair
Al-Juarismi (Algorithm) ca. 800, responding on the value of the human being.
A Web 3 platform should only dedicate itself to improving the techno-scientific conditions of its users, in a market avid for speculation?
Altwoo in its development tries to be a reflective platform on the digital relations of its historical course. The theoretical functionalities that it seeks to provide its users with more information, immersion and control over their commercial and financial interactions are not accidental.
The AltWoo project considers certain shortcomings that have conditioned Bitcoin, generating limitations to its adoption. One of which corresponds to its financial and commercial development, which occurs within modern capitalist dynamics.
In this context, it can be considered that its gradual adoption requires greater investment by people, that is, exchanging their capital-work converted into fiat money for bitcoin, which would grant certain advantages due to its limited supply, that is, a correlative monetary valuation due to the increase in demand for the asset, without the increase in its supply over time being a big problem until its 21 million are released.
The Bitcoin proposal is faced with the current Financial System, which has been constantly criticized from a social perspective, since since its digitization it has continued to cause derisory concentrations of capital, drained towards corporations, developed countries and their elites, increasing the gap between a small percentage of beneficiaries and a large percentage of deprived throughout the world, causing micro and macro economic inequalities that are difficult to ignore, even when there are relative improvements in reducing poverty and increasing development.
Therefore, we can ask the following indirect questions to Nakamoto: Is Bitcoin a tool to increase the concentration of capital or distribute it? What would be its role in ideal systemic conditions according to its creator? And what are the real effects to date and its projections in a massive adoption?.
Observing the crypto ecosystem or community superficially, we could interpret that those who have benefited, since the early years of the last decade, correspond to early adopters from developed countries and even large capital investors. The following generations, after their halvings, try to get on the bandwagon of their commercial rather than technological projections, which would be a greater number of speculators, than contributors of a long-term adoption base, these same ones have also caused the great volatility characteristic of price fluctuations, which the anachronistics of the status quo of finance and the traditional market both fear and criticize.
Despite such an environment, Bitcoin would be a real and effective alternative to national monetary systems, which from the global north have been a tool of commercial neo-colonial dominance through debt, blockades and permanent devaluation and from the south have been an example of disasters economic, organized by political decisions and elitist sabotage.
If in a hypothetical global scenario, nation states were to give up monetary issuance and adopt Bitcoin or cryptographic system, one of their main sources of funds would be affected, therefore, states would have to adopt a role of resource efficiency and creation of new processes for obtaining capital to maintain large amounts of unproductive labor. The immediate effect would also be the nullification of the depreciation of labor-value due to inflation, derived from the monetary emission of governments, therefore, a multidimensional benefit would be granted to the majority of citizens, especially the popular classes that receive the greatest impact in the depreciation of their labor.
In this hypothetical reality, even citizens would prefer to rely on financing cryptographic projects associated with the administration of governments or branches of government, which lower costs and are modernized by programmed functions or automated work.
But the problem is not only the State, but also the agents of the capitalist system, which in turn have a similar logic to the State, that of appropriating capital-labor through all its structures and chains, which they then distribute in a pyramidal fashion, but in this case the diversified agents do so through the commercial and financial systems. In our understanding, both the State and the capitalist agents move to the same rhythm and dance around those who create the true value, from labor, which in effect is: the capacity to transform reality.
So just as we assume fundamental changes in the functioning of the state for universal and social benefit, so too the capitalist structures and their agents could be replaced by automated and intelligent systems that are capable of objectively redistributing resources, optimizing to such a degree as to prevent usury, so characteristic of the elites or corporations, which, in the absence of the state, expand without regard for ecological and ethical conditions.
Aristotle ca. 350 BC, Chapter V. Miscellaneous Questions, Eudemian Ethics.
Apart from considering the hypothetical, certain changes of the future are imminent, especially those associated with technology, since nations or populations that do not adopt them and stubbornly cling to the old powers and markets will be impoverished, either by dependence or unequal exchange relations with other nations or communities that surpass them or by the transfer of value associated with scientific-technological changes that they refused to observe and understand. The historical movement of knowledge revolutions and their industries take less and less time according to statistics, therefore, the best protection for the new generations of any territory correspond to their link with new technologies.
Perhaps, these are the ideal conditions for a Bitcoin recognized and freely adopted by a global society, however, one of the conditions that its creator estimated is not being fulfilled and it is the one associated with data mining, which should have been done by Bitcoin users, giving them the processing capacity and receiving a reward. Instead we see how large conglomerates have concentrated the processing power and distorted Nakamoto’s idea of peer to peer decentralization, which perhaps did not take into account the references to capitalists, which portrayed the criticisms of the 19th century liberation theories, which blamed the misery of factory workers on those who managed to concentrate the means of production and subjugate them. From here were born the ideas of cooperativism and mutualism, which would be the worthy institutions of any idea of decentralization.
So, according to the current conditions we could observe two enemies of Nakamoto’s system, on the one hand the states and the traditional markets entrenched in their status quo and protection of interests as any old historical power in transition, on the other hand, the same initial community of bitcoiners, but not the small investors, but the large speculators, who have caused an “inorganic growth”, i.e. a growth that has not been projected by Satoshi, where Bitcoin users were the ones who would be responsible for sustaining its blockchain and therefore the operations of the ecosystem.
We could stop beating around the bush and summarize what: it is greed and avarice, characteristics of the agents of the modern capitalist system, the States and even us individuals with this intrinsic paradigm, who have taken the reins and try to control Bitcoin and crypto ecosystems to get the maximum return, with a standard of moral and ethical deficiency that underpins most projects.
The different centers of power try to see how to adapt these tools to maximize their positions, so rather than an interest in technology and advances for human progress, we have before us mere speculators of performance, whether they are individuals, institutions, corporations or governments.
And here we are not trying to make a value judgment of the events or their characters, but to observe the facts and portray them in order to project eventual panoramas. Thus we could conclude that the current reading is the true one, even though it may contain multiple errors of interpretation.
The search for truth, as a good of virtue, has been one of the great challenges of philosophers and thinkers, since it concentrates the idea that such an attitude provides humanity with well-being and progress for its own sake.
AltWoo could be dedicated only to project an innovation platform, speculate around it and get returns. But it has a desire that goes beyond that: it wants to contribute to human progress, however small the material contribution may be, we think it requires a lot of courage and some eventual detachment. Bitcoin is a great contribution to humanity, its theoretical, technological and value-based proposal represents fundamental advances, however, it contains exogenous errors in its system that perhaps we could help to solve, repair or complement. These errors are caused by the same predominant social dynamics and are probably very difficult to overcome, if not with the understanding and self-criticism of the same ecosystems inside and outside the cryptographic world.
How to overcome human greed and avarice for the construction of new paradigms? This is not just a good idea, it is an urgent task, since the models predict that if the majority of the world’s population adopts the dynamics of the “developed nations” it will practically self-destruct, causing consumption and destruction of resources that are essential for its own existence.
Therefore, here there is no room for negationism and absurd theories, but rather the observation of current, historical facts and the proposal of problem solving, which concerns us in particular as a project within a new generation of relations of the global technological, financial and commercial system.
We have had the audacity to allude to Satochi Nakamoto and his creation Bitcoin, to observe the unfairness we see in its development and to project that if the current actors prevail, cryptographic development could be hegemonized politically and monopolized economically, without generating great benefits to a global society, but would end up increasing the abysmal and absurd gaps that have developed the paradigms of past centuries.
We are projecting the new versions and functionalities to make the necessary leaps to overcome this rhetoric and leave only a precedent of will and real work, building a fair global society and to contribute to a new post-capitalist consciousness.
To victory
